Re: MIB template issues

["C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>]

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, David B Harrington wrote:
> The new xml2rfc was not meant to permit putting appendices before the
> references, as the mail below shows, even though it worked for my
> template using the experimental revision in some cases, and was
> considered valid against the DTD by XMLSpy. Oh well.
> 
> The RFC Editor doesn't *require* appendices before the references, and
> putting them before the references causes some problems with xml2rfc.
> I don't want to waste my political capital fighting that battle.

Well, thanks for trying.  It's too bad that the xml2rfc folks and the
RFC Editor can't get together and work out a consistent set of style
guidelines.  But I can see why you don't want to step into that cow-pie.

Ironically, I did try to strictly follow the guidelines in 2223bis
when I laid out the sections in the MIB review guidelines doc, and
so RFC 4181 has (unnumbered) appendices before the (unnumbered)
references.  But I did it all in nroff.  Some time ago Bert floated
the idea of converting the guidelines doc into xml2rfc.  Looks like
my efforts to follow the published style rules have made that hard.

Again, thanks for your efforts.

Mike