Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org designates 2001:1890:126c::1:1e as permitted sender) client-ip=2001:1890:126c::1:1e;
Message-ID: <50E476B2.4070704@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:04:34 -0500
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
	rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: abnf-discuss@ietf.org
References: <50DCD850.3020106@alum.mit.edu>
	<alpine.LSU.2.00.1301021022570.15409@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
	<50E4633B.4010604@alum.mit.edu>
	<alpine.LSU.2.00.1301021739110.15409@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1301021739110.15409@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [abnf-discuss] Some thoughts about how to make ABNF more
 convenient to use
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org

On 1/2/13 12:43 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> On 1/2/13 5:29 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
>>>
>>> xml2rfc understands <artwork type="abnf"> - see section 6.2 of its README.
>>> It performs ABNF syntax checks and colourizing, but I don't think it
>>> checks for undefined rule names (though I haven't tried it recently).
>>
>> Wow! Is this documented anywhere?
>
> Here's a link: http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html#rfc.section.6.2
>
> If you use xml2rfc you should be aware there is more to it than RFC 2629.
> As well as the README there is also a draft update to the base spec,
> http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html

I was aware of the update. But I had not (till now) investigated the 
README. (Shame on me!)

ISTM that the RFC and its update should cover the xml syntax, and its 
semantics. And something else (e.g. the README) should talk about 
implementation-specifics of the xml2rfc tool. I gather that is the 
intent, but it looks like the tool and the README have gotten a bit 
ahead of the update to the syntax.

(If I had seen in the xml syntax that 'abnf' was an expected value, then 
I *might* have gone hunting for more info on how that was used.)

	Thanks,
	Paul

_______________________________________________
abnf-discuss mailing list
abnf-discuss@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abnf-discuss