Network Working Group | P. Hoffman |
Internet-Draft | ICANN |
Intended status: Informational | J. Hildebrand |
Expires: August 13, 2016 | Cisco |
February 10, 2016 |
This document describes some aspects of the “prep tool” that is expected to be created when the new RFC v3 specification is deployed.¶
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress”.¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 13, 2016.¶
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.¶
For the future of the RFC format, the RFC Editor has decided that XML (using the XML2RFCv3 vocabulary [I-D.iab-xml2rfc]) is the canonical format, in the sense that it is the data that is blessed by the process as the actual RFC. See [RFC6949] for more detail on this.¶
Most people will read other formats, such as HTML, PDF, ASCII text, or other formats of the future, however. In order to ensure each of these formats is as similar as possible to one another as well as the canonical XML, there is a desire that the translation from XML into the other formats will be straightforward syntactic translation. To make that happen, a good amount of data will need to be in the XML format that is not there today. That data will be added by a program called the “prep tool”, which will often run as a part of the xml2rfc process.¶
This draft specifies the steps that the prep tool will have to take. As changes to [I-D.iab-xml2rfc] are made, this document will be updated.¶
The details (particularly any vocabularies) described in this document are expected to change based on experience gained in implementing the RFC production center’s toolset. Revised documents will be published capturing those changes as the toolset is completed. Other implementers must not expect those changes to remain backwards-compatible with the details described in this document.¶
The prep tool will have several settings:¶
There are only a few differences between the two settings. For example, the boilerplate output will be different, as will the date output on the front page.¶
Note that this only describes what the IETF-sponsored prep tool does. Others might create their own work-alike prep tools for their own formatting needs. However, an output format developer does not need to change the prep tool in order to create their own formatter: they only need to be able to consume prepared text. The IETF-sponsored prep tool runs in two different modes: “I-D” mode when the tool is run during Internet-Draft submission and processing, and “RFC production mode” when the tool is run by the RFC Production Center (RPC) while producing an RFC.¶
This tool is described as if it is a separate tool so that we can reason about its architectural properties. In actual implementation, it might be a part of a larger suite of functionality.¶
When the IETF draft submission tool accepts v3 XML as an input format, the submission tool runs the submitted file through the prep tool. This is called “I-D mode” in this document. If the tool finds no errors, it keeps two XML files: the submitted file and the prepped file.¶
The prepped file provides a record of what a submitter was attesting to at the time of submission. It represents a self-contained record of what any external references resolved to at the time of submission.¶
The prepped file is used by the IETF formatters to create outputs such as HTML, PDF, and text (or the tools act in a way indistinguishable from this). The message sent out by the draft submission tool includes a link to the original XML as well as the other outputs, including the prepped XML.¶
The prepped XML can be used by tools not yet developed to output new formats that have as similar output as possible to the current IETF formatters. For example, if the IETF creates a .mobi output renderer later, it can run that renderer on all of the prepped XML that has been saved, ensuring that the content of included external references and all of the part numbers and boilerplate will be the same as what was produced by the previous IETF formatters at the time the document was first uploaded.¶
During AUTH48, the RPC will run the prep tool in canonical RFC preparation mode and make the results available to the authors so they can see what the final output might look like. When the document is done with AUTH48 review, the RPC runs the prep tool in canonical RFC preparation mode one last time, locks down the canonicalized XML, runs the formatters for the publication formats, and publishes all of those. It is probably a good idea for the RPC to keep a copy of the input XML file from the various steps of the RFC production process.¶
This document assumes that the prep tool will be used in the following manner by the RFC Production Center; they may use something different, or with different configuration.¶
Similarly to I-D’s, the prepped XML can be used later to re-render the output formats, or to generate new formats.¶
The steps listed here are in order of processing. In all cases where the prep tool would “add” an attribute or element, if that attribute or element already exists, the prep tool will check that the attribute or element is correct. If the value is incorrect, the prep tool will warn with the old and new values, then replace the incorrect value with the new value.¶
There will be a need for Internet-Draft authors who include files from their local disk (such as for <artwork src=”mydrawing.svg”/>) to have the contents of those files inlined to their drafts before submitting them to the Internet-Draft processor. (There is a possibility that the Internet-Draft processor will allow XML files and accompanying files to be submitted at the same time, but this seems troublesome from a security, portability, and complexity standpoint.) For these users, having a local copy of the prep tool that has an option to just inline all local files would be terribly useful. That option would be a proper subset of the steps given in Section 5.¶
A feature that might be useful in a local prep tool would be the inverse of the “just inline” option would be “extract all”. This would allow a user who has a v3 RFC or Internet-Draft to dump all of the <artwork> and <sourcecode> elements into local files instead of having to find each one in the XML. This option might even do as much validation as possible on the extracted <sourcecode> elements. This feature might also remove some of the features added by the prep tool (such as part numbers and slugifiedName’s starting with “n-“) in order to make the resulting file easier to edit.¶
None.¶
Steps in this document attempt to prevent the <artwork> and <sourcecode> entities from exposing the contents of files outside the directory in which the document being processed resides.¶
Many people contributed valuable ideas to this document. Special thanks go to Robert Sparks for his in-depth review and contributions early in the development of this document.¶