Subject: [rfc-i] <seriesInfo>

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 18:06:43 -0600

There's been some confusion about the <seriesInfo> element:

- When <seriesInfo> is a child of <reference>, the 'stream' attribute
isn't used.

- When <seriesInfo> is a child of <front>, it's unclear how exactly to
handle the 'stream' attribute. For instance, since <seriesInfo> can
appear more than once (such as in the case of a BCP), there's potential
confusion if the values of the 'stream' attribute are inconsistent.

- The 'status' attribute hasn't been used at all.

Based on discussion in the RFC XML and style guide change management
team, here is a proposal:

1. Remove 'stream' from <seriesInfo>

2. Add a new <stream> element as a child of <front>

3. Remove 'status' from <seriesInfo>

As far as I can see, this would make the use of <seriesInfo> consistent
whether it is a child of <front> or <reference>.

Feedback is welcome.

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

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 10:03:49 +0200

Am 20.07.2021 um 02:06 schrieb Peter Saint-Andre:
> ...

As far as I can tell from a quick check of AUTH48 XML (attached), the
only use of the stream attribute so far was inside the document's front,
and it always replicates the value in /rfc/@submissionType. So what is
it actually for?

If the use case is to augment a *reference* with more data - why hasn't
it be used for that? This really needs a proper design with clear use
cases, and the solution optimally should not ne specific for IETF
documents (hint: there's already <refcontent>).

Best regards, Julian