Internet DRAFT - draft-carpenter-rswg-format-details
draft-carpenter-rswg-format-details
RSWG B. E. Carpenter
Internet-Draft Univ. of Auckland
Intended status: Informational 26 February 2024
Expires: 29 August 2024
Policy Considerations for Changes to RFCs
draft-carpenter-rswg-format-details-00
Abstract
This document clarifies the policy framework for changes to RFC
formats and associated tool chains.
About This Document
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Status information for this document may be found at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-rswg-format-
details/.
Discussion of this document takes place on the RSWG Working Group
mailing list (mailto:rswg@rfc-editor.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rswg/.
Status of This Memo
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 https://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 29 August 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Carpenter Expires 29 August 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RFC Change Policy February 2024
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Policy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Appendix A. Change Log [RFC Editor: please remove] . . . . . . . 3
A.1. Draft-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1. Introduction
The scope of work of the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG) is set by
[RFC9280]. In particular, Section 3 states that policies drafted by
the RSWG "might include, but are not limited to, document formats,
processes for publication and dissemination of RFCs, and overall
management of the RFC Series."
This definition is not explicit about the level of detail in document
formats. Specifically, do technical details of the markup language,
graphics formats, and internationalized character sets lie within the
policy remit of RSWG, or are they the responsibility of the RFC
Production Center and the IETF LLC tool support team?
The purpose of the present document is to resolve this question.
2. Policy Considerations
High level issues, such as what markup is used for documents
(currently XML2RFCv3), what graphics format (current a subset of
SVG), and what publication formats are used (currently plain UTF-8
text, HTML, and PDF/A) are policy matters in the purview of the RSWG,
with approval by the RFC Series Approval Board (RSAB). Similarly,
how to manage changes in these formats is clearly a policy matter.
Technical details, for example of the XML2RFC vocabulary and of the
SVG subset, need to be agreed as the result of a consensus process
that includes the tools team, the RPC, and the wider community. The
best existing venue for forming such a consensus is the RSWG, with
approval by the RSAB. Since the RSWG was formed and announced as a
Carpenter Expires 29 August 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RFC Change Policy February 2024
policy working group, it is strongly recommended that such technical
details should be developed by one or more designated RSWG design
teams, as foreseen in Section 3.1.1.4 of [RFC9280]. The resulting
technical documents will be remitted to the RSWG and processed as if
they were policy documents.
Practical issues about the range of tools provided for authors, for
readers and for the RPC's own use, and when and how such tools are
implemented and updated, are operational matters in the purview of
the RPC and of IETF LLC.
3. IANA Considerations
No IANA actions are needed.
4. Security Considerations
This document does not directly affect the security of the Internet.
5. Acknowledgements
Useful comments were received from ...
6. Informative References
[RFC9280] Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "RFC Editor Model (Version 3)",
RFC 9280, DOI 10.17487/RFC9280, June 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9280>.
Appendix A. Change Log [RFC Editor: please remove]
A.1. Draft-00
* Original version
Author's Address
Brian E. Carpenter
The University of Auckland
School of Computer Science
The University of Auckland
PB 92019
Auckland 1142
New Zealand
Email: brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
Carpenter Expires 29 August 2024 [Page 3]
