From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 3285 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2020 23:13:12 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 2 Sep 2020 23:13:12 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0F0149C0CB; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 09:13:08 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA86D9BFDB; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 09:12:23 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="o/KF6iGc"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id B7A159BFDB; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 09:12:19 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f176.google.com (mail-qk1-f176.google.com [209.85.222.176]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD9E29BFDA for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 09:12:18 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f176.google.com with SMTP id g72so1388805qke.8 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2020 16:12:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=qAGp/17oSGFU21czkvHvgdMKz2DJmd+nvWzT57SblCY=; b=o/KF6iGcrbok211olhOSaECXsnkUblLfGUKYzK0D3o6JwZsI2zo/+vIMzoTI4rTd9h ip8/bIhPRfz7WH0IBKiRcYAmPiUKWZABNaykzCZluEOnbb+hhgnfklBC+IeRzdAVZxCw 2dnIk9K8yrRAIS/WUFgYvgGL18/f5A3IetcFMZqEJnia1KAISt993brxA0+KeBrHkzeF YXCeLwT2uPm05sibR8RD+5eXcOIu+o9bs9O7jQfb7wuxhNbn2UejyDx4SU5/+O6r+tLG AD6lPEjslE0qpSwxtLyUamzyBYxCyuihmzuSUVxxXfnPlQsXDU5RBiHmApBBVu7R8tYA fksA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=qAGp/17oSGFU21czkvHvgdMKz2DJmd+nvWzT57SblCY=; b=oo1oxLkr23qJIwCxhpYm5kNwCVAtHwQSPfhfiN1jcvwITftXYUuNLuVwkSL7jb1MRK HUZofyHngCy389Kss7dVhqMtzfAaHy2QVwlcn91BVqcujCRzGf16mnsXwWCD6qsCnDYN xzUyNgi2lFSX8B7OtNW6rUS7dxaEZ1s8lMbqQBRYggalITnhtQHnbZPkLudsbb7GREbL APyt7uuzqUFWwZmoCQuEoTprzSdc0p+Si2B+Ahj6wvusQmICj4gp4KmgbozMyyJYeT1c NsBNTLU9k3dkwM6VCiHoAKmBnpK3B1nPlQC+gY6fiJjvdbM+M77KzSyfkmE3ZtjKXMOg 3ZJA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530EIlpcxdB61rxN3gc7s5uyXqnmB/Ul88GEZXy8qsTVX2UQ6t6R 0s7vU+FuG/wKOC+SpF9lbR9sdOltevz/NlhNyeG5Z2D6nq8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzkHmTu5hLUWzqxKsu1C0jLMpHtjyUKGPK3+heCQWUQpV7DXkNC+a18aH8MKY8GT1m/1wOD6O4J66lSJjtuTIs= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:134f:: with SMTP id c15mr335239qkl.316.1599088337471; Wed, 02 Sep 2020 16:12:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dan Cross Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2020 19:11:41 -0400 Message-ID: To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000051cd8905ae5cc49a" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Unix tools to aid in the production of Internet RFCs? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000051cd8905ae5cc49a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thanks all, for the very interesting responses to this thread. It sounds like _most_ of the Unix-based preparation efforts centered around an `nroff`-based workflow until the advent of XML. - Dan C. On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 5:24 PM Dan Cross wrote: > Honestly, I'm not quite sure if this is a TUHS, COFF, or IH question. But > since my background with respect to such things is largely Unix centric, I > thought I'd ask in that context, hence asking on TUHS. > > I assume some of the regulars on this list have authored RFCs (of the IETF > etc variety). The RFC format seems fairly well fixed: table of contents, > fixed number of lines per page, page numbers and dates in the footer, and > so forth. The format is sufficiently complex that it seems like some > tooling could be usefully employed to aid in producing these documents. > > So I'm curious: what tools did people use to produce those documents? > Perhaps `nroff` with custom macros or something? > > - Dan C. > > --00000000000051cd8905ae5cc49a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks all, for the very interesting responses to this thr= ead. It sounds like _most_ of the Unix-based preparation efforts centered a= round an `nroff`-based workflow until the advent of XML.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 - Dan C.


On Wed, Aug 26, 2= 020 at 5:24 PM Dan Cross <crossd@gma= il.com> wrote:
Honestly, I'm not quite sure if this is a TUHS, = COFF, or IH question. But since my background with respect to such things i= s largely Unix centric, I thought I'd ask in that context, hence asking= on TUHS.

I assume some of the regulars on this list hav= e authored RFCs (of the IETF etc variety). The RFC format seems fairly well= fixed: table of contents, fixed number of lines per page, page numbers and= dates in the footer, and so forth. The format is sufficiently complex=C2= =A0that it seems like some tooling could be usefully employed=C2=A0to aid i= n producing these documents.

So I'm curious: w= hat tools did people use to produce those documents? Perhaps `nroff` with c= ustom macros or something?

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 - Dan C.

--00000000000051cd8905ae5cc49a--