You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
owner:jbothun@concentricsky.comresolution_fixedtype_defect | by miek@miek.nl
Hello,
I just started playing with xml2rfc version 2, to see how
it works wrt version 1 and pandoc2rfc. Version two seems
to work OK, and creates a nice looking text file. I made
the following observations.
It seems the Roman list style isn't supported anymore --
this was a hidden feature in xml2rfc version 1:
WARNING: No %c or %d found in list format string: format %i.
Or uppercase:
WARNING: No %c or %d found in list format string: format %I.
Also non Roman uppercase letters don't work anymore:
WARNING: No %c or %d found in list format string: format %C.
I would consider that a bug.
Also, lines like:
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
Halfway through the document, make the parsing fail. xml2rfc(1) handles
this OK (just skips it, I assume?) These lines are easily created when
cutting and pasting a reference into your doc.
That's a feature, caused by using a proper XML parser.
xml2rfc(1) uses two parameters on the command line:
xml2rfc<infile>.xml<outfile>.txt
xml2rfc(2) discards the second one and writes.txt
I'm not a fan of xml2rfc(1)'s behavior, but making xml2rfc(2)
behave different makes upgrading harder...
I don't think it makes a big difference; most people do not run local versions anyway right now.
lost some functionality of customized lists. e.g. list style="format %C", "format %I", "format %i" don't work. (I have confirmed these.)
Ones that Miek listed that appear to have been fixed:
xref with target of section anchor has wrong text output.
owner:jbothun@concentricsky.com
resolution_fixed
type_defect
| by miek@miek.nlI would consider that a bug.
That's a feature, caused by using a proper XML parser.
I don't think it makes a big difference; most people do not run local versions anyway right now.
That's a bug.
That's a bug.
Issue migrated from trac:37 at 2022-02-05 12:24:06 +0000
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: