RFC Format BoF IETF 88 Vancouver, BC, Canada. Homework Please read the following before the BoF https://www.rfc-editor.org/rse/wiki/doku.php?id=design:start.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DISPATCH WG RTCWEB Adhoc IETF-80. Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft.
Advertisements

Neal Stublen Content Models  Metadata content Data not necessarily presented on the page ○ title, link, meta, style  Flow content.
RFC Baby Steps Adding UTF-8 Support Tony Hansen IETF 83 March 27, 2012.
CCAMP Working Group Online Agenda and Slides at: Tools start page:
IETF 90: NetExt WG Meeting. Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet- Draft.
XP 1 HTML: The Language of the Web A Web page is a text file written in a language called Hypertext Markup Language. A markup language is a language that.
RFC Format Session Tuesday, 22 July :00-14:00 Ballroom C.
XML Publisher Business Applications Government Forms.
SMI to XSD Translations IETF70 David Harrington. Agenda The Need The Approaches Comparisons.
1 IETF Status at IETF 76 Russ Housley, IETF Chair.
Dime WG Status Update IETF#81, THURSDAY, July 28, Afternoon Session I.
DIME WG IETF 82 Dime WG Agenda & Status THURSDAY, November 17, 2011 Jouni Korhonen & Lionel Morand.
SIPCLF Working Group Spencer Dawkins Theo Zourzouvillys IETF 76 – November 2009 Hiroshima, Japan.
IETF #82 DRINKS WG Meeting Taipei, Taiwan Fri, Nov 18 th
INP 150: Basic HTML Term: Winter 2002 Section: H1 Time: Mon/Wed 5:30- 7:25 pm Place: TI237 Instructor: Paul J. Millis.
CLUE WG IETF-91 Paul Kyzivat (WG co-chair) Mary Barnes (WG co-chair)
November 2010IETF TRILL WG1 TRILL Working Group TRansparent Interconnection of Lots of Links Mailing list: Tools site:
1 IETF Status at IETF 79 Russ Housley IETF Chair.
CLUE WG IETF-84 Mary Barnes (WG co-chair) Paul Kyzivat (WG co-chair)
Authority To Citizen Alerts IETF 81 Quebec. Note: Note Well the Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all.
1 Yet Another Mail Working Group IETF 78 July 29, 2010.
Web Authorization Protocol (oauth) IETF 90, Toronto Chairs: Hannes Tschofenig, Derek Atkins Responsible AD: Kathleen Moriarty Mailing List:
Transport Service (TAPS) Aaron Falk
IETF Trust Chair Report Ed Juskevicius November 19, 2008 Minneapolis, MN, USA.
IETF 89, LONDON, UK LISP Working Group. 2 Agenda and slides:  lisp.html Audio Stream 
Agenda Marc Blanchet and Chris Weber July 2011 IRI WG IETF 81 1.
DMM WG IETF 84 DMM WG Agenda & Status Tuesday, July 31 st, 2012 Jouni Korhonen, Julien Laganier.
IPR WG IETF 62 Minneapolis. IPR WG: Administrivia Blue sheets Scribes Use the microphones Note Well.
3 August th IETF - San Diego, CA, USA1 SPEECHSC Eric Burger Dave Oran
AVTEXT Keith Drage Magnus Westerlund
Agenda Behcet Sarikaya Dirk von Hugo November 2012 FMC BOF IETF
1 Yet Another Mail Working Group IETF 76 November 11, 2009.
RSE & RSOC Report IETF 88 Vancouver, BC, Canada. RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) IAB Members –Joel Halpern (Lead) –Bernard Aboba Non-IAB Members.
NETWORK-BASED MOBILITY EXTENSIONS WG (NETEXT) July 28 th, 2011 IETF81 1.
Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) Chairs: Linda Dunbar Adrian Farrel IETF 95, Thursday April 7, 2016,
6TSCH Webex 07/05/2013. Reminder: This call is recorded the record is public Minutes are taken and published to the ML.
DIME WG IETF 83 DIME WG Agenda & Status Thursday, March 29, 2012 Jouni Korhonen, Lionel Morand.
SIPPING Working Group IETF 67 Mary Barnes Gonzalo Camarillo.
CLUE WG IETF-85 Mary Barnes (WG co-chair) Paul Kyzivat (WG co-chair)
OPSAWG chairs: Scott Bradner Christopher Liljenstolpe.
Agenda Wednesday, July 29, :00 – 15:00 Congresshall B Please join the Jabber room: LEDBAT WG IETF 75.
Thu 30 July 2009SIDR IETF 75 Stockholm, SE1 SIDR Working Group IETF 75 Stockholm, SE THURSDAY, July 30, 2009.
CLUE WG Interim Meeting San Jose, CA Sept , 2012
STIR Secure Telephone Identity Revisited
WG Chairs Forum Wednesday 29 March 2017.
Working in Groups in Canvas
CLUE WG Interim Meeting San Jose, CA Sept , 2012
CLUE WG Interim Meeting San Jose, CA Sept , 2012
Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) WG
Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made.
Mary Barnes (WG co-chair) Paul Kyzivat (WG co-chair)
IETF update – “What’s hot?” RFC Update
MODERN Working Group IETF 97 November 14, 2016.
CAPWAP Working Group IETF 73 Minneapolis 18 Nov 2008, 17:10-18:10
IETF68 Mini-BOF MIB-Doctor-Sponsored MIB Document Templates
IETF-IEEE Relationship RFC 4441 Summary
Joint OPS Area and OPSAWG Meeting
Kathleen Moriarty, Trusted Execution Environment Provisioning (TEEP) BoF IETF-100 November 2017 Chairs: Nancy Cam-Winget,
Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made.
Thursday, 20th of July 2017.
HOW TO USE THE NEW GLOBAL GRANT REPORT
JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) Working Group
RFC Series Editor Updates
DetNet WG Chairs: Lou Berger
SIPREC WG, Interim virtual meeting , GMT
RFC Series Editor Updates
TEAS CCAMP MPLS PCE Working Groups
Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services (PALS) WG Status IETF 100 Singapore Co-Chairs: Stewart Bryant and Andy Malis
Scott Bradner & Martin Thomson
Audio/Video Transport Extensions (avtext) Working Group
Presentation transcript:

RFC Format BoF IETF 88 Vancouver, BC, Canada

Homework Please read the following before the BoF This is a public read-only wiki space

Agenda Background The RFC Format Design Team Current Status Next Steps Expected questions

Background The format announcement in May indicated several things: –the canonical format we are exploring for RFCs is XML –four publication formats will be created from that XML: HTML, EPUB, text and PDF –non-ASCII characters would be allowed in a controlled fashion

RFC Format Design Team An RFC format design team was put together during IETF 87 in Berlin to clear up the details implied by those statements Many thanks to Nevil Brownlee (ISE), Tony Hansen, Joe Hildebrand, Paul Hoffman, Julian Reschke, Adam Roach, Alice Russo, Robert Sparks (Tools Team liaison), and Dave Thaler for their active participation

Current Status (1) In Progress: documenting the current vocabulary and description of the current xml2rfc DTD and bring it up to date and drafting the proposed changes going forward – In Progress: requirements for the HTML and text formats –EPUB should be derived from HTML, and PDF from text –acceptance of draft-hildebrand-html-rfc as a solid starting place for the HTML details –

Current Status (2) Agreement in principle to include non-ASCII characters in RFCs –details being worked out in conjunction with the i18n program of the IAB A high level work flow for how the tool will be used in production by authors and the RFC Editor – In progress: details around the use of images – –RFCs will be able to have embedded SVG art for figures, at the discretion of the authors

Next Steps Finish the xml2rfc v2 and v3 descriptions and requirements Finish draft-hildebrand-html-rfc Create the RFP to start on the specs, followed by the development phase Discuss what, if any, changes should be phased in versus a formal cut-over Discuss how this affects the submission process and I-D format

Expected Question #1 What about things like look-and-feel? –across the board, images and tables will be restricted to no more than 80 characters –for HTML and EPUB, we are expecting reflow able text, which will change the look to an RFC viewed in those tools –for HTML, HTML-savvy people will be able to control how an RFC looks, the fonts used, size of fonts, layout of headers The RFC Editor will have a layout they publish

Expected Question #2 How will non-ASCII characters be handled? –still under discussion with the i18n program –Non-ASCII should be consistent across all publication formats (text, PDF, HTML, and EPUB).

Non-ASCII examples (color and boldface highlight examples – their use is not part of the proposal for non-ASCII text) CURRENT (draft-ietf-precis-framework) : However, the problem is made more serious by introducing the full range of Unicode code points into protocol strings. For example, the characters U+13DA U+13A2 U+13B5 U+13AC U+13A2 U+13AC U+13D2 from the Cherokee block look similar to the ASCII characters "STPETER" as they might look when presented using a "creative" font family. PROPOSED/NEW: However, the problem is made more serious by introducing the full range of Unicode code points into protocol strings. For example, the characters U+13DA U+13A2 U+13B5 U+13AC U+13A2 U+13AC U+13D2 () from the Cherokee block look similar to the ASCII characters "STPETER" as they might look when presented using a "creative" font family. ALSO ACCEPTABLE: However, the problem is made more serious by introducing the full range of Unicode code points into protocol strings. For example, the characters "" (U+13DA U+13A2 U+13B5 U+13AC U+13A2 U+13AC U+13D2) from the Cherokee block look similar to the ASCII characters "STPETER" as they might look when presented using a "creative" font family.