Subject: [Xml-sg-cmt] topics 2021-02-15

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:44:02 -0700

As we continue to work through open issues, here are a few potential
topics for today...

0. agenda bashing :-)

1. t indent='0'

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/189

Where did we settle on this? Can we at least not set the value to zero
everywhere, since it's the default? ;-)

2. blockquote within aside

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/190

3. multiple address elements within author

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/161

4. multiple emails within address

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/188

It seems we have agreement - what's the next step?

5. stream element & default value for seriesInfo

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/180

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/181

It seems we have agreement - what's the next step?

6. list in aside

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/167

Shall we close this issue?

7. aside in dl

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/192

This was requested by the RPC:

https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/changeset/3786

Julian pointed out that perhaps this should be allowed in li as well
(and that this is in dl, not dd - or it is both?):

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xml2rfc-dev/?q=aside

Was there other discussion of this change? Can we provide a bit more
documentation of the rationale?

8. table in dd

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/186

I haven't found the discussion of this on list or in Subversion.

9. dl hanging

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/171

https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/38

I think we can close this one, we just need to document the decision in
7991bis.

/psa

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Feb 2021 11:57:10 -0500

> everywhere, since it's the default? ;-)

Pro everywhere: the preptool RFC says that it explicitly inserts all 
the defaulted values in case the defaults change in the future

Con everywhere: there are a zillion publiished RFCs that have <t> with no 
indent, so this one can't change

Meta topic: if we agree we can make mechanical changes to the XML and 
republiish, this issue is a lot less urgent.

I was supposed to try and figure out <tt> but my second COVID shot knocked 
the middle out of my week.

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly