Subject: [xml2rfc] #323 (vocabulary): <referencegroup> vs RFC style requirements

From: "xml2rfc issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 10:59:25 -0000

#323: <referencegroup> vs RFC style requirements

 I don't believe <referencegroup> as currently defined in the vocab and
 HTML specs addresses the RFC Style requirement for citing BCPs/STDs.

 Either we need to fix <referencegroup> or change/clarify the RFC Style
 document.

-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |      Owner:
     Type:  defect                 |     Status:  new
 Priority:  medium                 |  Milestone:
Component:  vocabulary             |    Version:  2.4.x
 Keywords:                         |
-----------------------------------+-------------------

Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/323>
xml2rfc <http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/>

---

From: "xml2rfc issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:25:53 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 See https://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-
 interest/2016-April/009562.html

-- 
------------------------------------+-------------------
Resolution:                         |   Keywords:
------------------------------------+-------------------

Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/323#comment:1>
xml2rfc <http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/>