Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Notes from last week's call? (And a question about v2tov3)

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:51:01 -0500

Are there any notes from last week's meeting?

I'm not sure I remember what we concluded for the v2 to v3 converter 
correctly.
I _think_ the direction was to roll it into the publication format 
converter specifications.
Am I misremembering?

That makes sense if we assume that v2 is one of the inputs the 
converters should accept
(as will be the case if this is an evolution of things that digest 
xml2rfc v2). If I'm remembering
the direction correctly, should I explicitly include consuming v2 as a 
requirement in the
publication format converter SoW?

RjS

---

From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 09:05:33 -0700

> converter specifications.

That is my recollection as well.

> publication format converter SoW?
Yes, that probably makes the most sense.

-Heather

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:02:18 -0400

> That is my recollection as well.

Yes, that was my recommendation, using my prototype as one of the inputs 
into the process.

> Yes, that probably makes the most sense.

The alternative is to have two tools. Which does not make sense since 
one of the stated reasons for converting from TCL to Python was to make 
such evolution more doable.

However, the goal MIGHT also be served by using a fork of the v2 
processor instead of having one processor that does everything.

I'm not certain which would be cleaner.

     Tony