Subject: [rfc-i] "removeInRFC" attribute for paragraphs?

From: Jeffrey Yasskin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:13:24 -0700

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-quic-transport-22#section-15 has an
"[[RFC editor: please remove the remainder of this section
before publication.]]" statement that doesn't seem to be directly encodable
in the https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-rfc7991bis-01#section-1.4.2
definitions
of [removeInRFC].

Is the intention that folks add a subsection for groups of paragraphs like
this?

https://wicg.github.io/webpackage/draft-yasskin-http-origin-signed-responses.html
has
a couple "RFC EDITOR PLEASE DELETE THIS NOTE" paragraphs that serve a
similar purpose, which aren't as easily segregated into subsections. Is my
style there bad practice, or would there be interest in allowing <t
removeInRFC=true> paragraphs?

Thanks,
Jeffrey
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:09:56 +0200

On 16.08.2019 19:13, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-quic-transport-22#section-15 has
> an "[[RFC editor: please remove the remainder of this section
> before publication.]]" statement that doesn't seem to be directly
> encodable in the
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-rfc7991bis-01#section-1.4.2 definitions
> of [removeInRFC].
>
> Is the intention that folks add a subsection for groups of paragraphs
> like this?

That was the intent.

> https://wicg.github.io/webpackage/draft-yasskin-http-origin-signed-responses.html has
> similar purpose, which aren't as easily segregated into subsections. Is
> my style there bad practice, or would there be interest in allowing <t

Did you consider making those comments? (<cref>)?

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Jeffrey Yasskin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:32:30 -0700

> Did you consider making those comments? (<cref>)?

I didn't consider that, and it looks appropriate. Thanks! I'm using
kramdown-rfc2629, whose documentation only mentions <cref> as being
generated by markdown-footnotes, which don't work when the source has
wrapped text, but I can just write <cref> literally in the source.

Jeffrey

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:34:40 +0200

On Aug 16, 2019, at 20:32, Jeffrey Yasskin <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> I’m using kramdown-rfc2629, whose documentation only mentions <cref> as being generated by markdown-footnotes, which don’t work when the source has wrapped text, but I can just write <cref> literally in the source.

Can you explain your problem with markdown footnotes?

(Writing literal XML of course always is a good workaround.)

Grüße, Carsten