Subject: [xml2rfc] sections before references in back matter

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:10:13 -0600

The RFC Document Style guide says:

      Many RFC documents have appendixes, which may be very extensive.
      In non-RFC documents, authors often position Appendixes at the
      very end, after the references.  However, RFCs that have large and
      dense technical Appendix sections make it difficult for a reader
      to find references that precede the appendixes.  In such cases,
      putting the references later may be advisable.

Notwithstanding the final sentence there, xml2rfc enforces putting the
references before any other section in the back matter. I assume that
xml2rfc is simply enforcing the DTD from RFC 2629:

   <!ELEMENT back        (references?,section*)>

However, the DTD seems to be wrong on this point.

I have an I-D in process that will put some back-matter content sections
before the references, so I suppose I'll need to ask the RFC Editor
production team to fix the order after the document is approved by the
IESG (assuming it is, of course!).

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 11:17:18 +0200

> IESG (assuming it is, of course!).

If this is a common case, it needs to be fixed in the DTD and the 
implementations.

That being said: one could argue that references can be found best when 
they always are in the same place. (Also when you can hyperlink to them :-)

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:39:24 -0700

On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:17 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> If this is a common case, it needs to be fixed in the DTD and the implementations.

I am the author of two documents that have gotten nailed by this, and we had to put the long appendices after the references because of xml2rfc, not because we wanted to.

> That being said: one could argue that references can be found best when they always are in the same place. (Also when you can hyperlink to them :-)

At this point, "the same place" is "before the appendixes which are variable length".

--Paul Hoffman

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 19:48:19 -0600

> I am the author of two documents that have gotten nailed by this, and we had to put the long appendices after the references because of xml2rfc, not because we wanted to.

Methinks I'll ask the RFC Editor team to move things around late in the
process.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/