[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML2RFC template for MIB modules
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 04:29:07PM -0400, David B Harrington wrote:
> I shared the template with a MIB module editor, who modified the
> template to use XML constructs (a simple list approach). We copied the
> RFC-editor on our discussion.
>
> The RFC editor has asked that the MIB template "include" a separate
> MIB file in ascii format suitable for smilint/smicng processing rather
> than using XML contructs for the contents of the MIB definitions. This
> would go inside an <artwork> element. Submitting the mib file separate
> from the XML makes their job of validating the MIB easier. (This is
> also easier for the MIB editor to do validations.)
I strongly favour the #include approach for MIB modules.
> Note, however, that I have so far been unable to find a suitable
> XML-valid mechanism for including the ascii source file. The ENTITY
> approach used for including XML snippets (like bibxml references)
> parses the included file. I can use a variant of ENTITY that does not
> parse the file (external/general IIRC), but we need to be certain that
> the ascii file has no XML-illegal characters such as > and < and /.
Does the following
<figure>
<artwork>
<?rfc include='FOO-MIB'?>
</artwork>
</figure>
not work?
> In the future, we can work on developing XML contructs for MIB
> modules, and once we get the validation tools to work with the XML
> constructs, that should be suitable for the RFC editor. While that is
> in process, we can use tools to process such XML constructs into an
> ascii file that can be included into the xml2rfc source.
I fail to see the added value... But then, I have seen people using
Word to write C code... And I must admit that I am guilty of using
emacs of all editing jobs, so my ramblings do not count at all. ;-)
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany