| Internet-Draft | Changing XML Syntax for RFCs | July 2023 |
| Thomson | Expires 26 January 2024 | [Page] |
The authoritative version of RFCs are published in an XML format. This format is chosen for its ability to capture semantic details. A high-level process is described for the revision of the RFC XML format.¶
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.¶
The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://martinthomson.github.io/rfc-syntax-change/draft-thomson-rswg-syntax-change.html. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-thomson-rswg-syntax-change/.¶
Discussion of this document takes place on the RFC Series Working Group Editorial Stream Working Group mailing list (mailto:[email protected]), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rswg/.¶
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/martinthomson/rfc-syntax-change.¶
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on 26 January 2024.¶
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document.¶
The canonical format for published RFCs is XML [RFC7990]. Historically, the published version of an RFC has been immutable (Section 7.6 of [RFC9280]).¶
The RFC format [RFC7991] is not able to address use cases that were not originally anticipated. It might also be possible to improve the format to better capture meaning.¶
Though it might be possible to evolve the format and only use the new format for the publication of new RFCs, this would mean that there would be no single format across the series. Tools that seek to process RFC XML would need to understand all iterations of the format.¶
The RFC Series Working Group (RSWG), constituted by [RFC9280], acts as custodian for the RFC XML format. If the RSWG reaches consensus, they can propose a revision to the XML format.¶
The RSWG publishes an RFC on the Editorial stream that describes the format change. An updated XML format is used for the publication of new RFCs. Some time might be necessary to implement those changes in tools and active documents.¶
Existing RFCs can be updated to use the new format. The RFC that describes format changes can also describe how the XML of existing RFCs will be updated.¶
Updates to the XML format need to ensure that any change to existing RFCs preserves - to the greatest extent possible - the semantics expressed in the original RFC. That is, the intent is that changes only update the XML syntax, they do not alter the semantics that are expressed using that syntax.¶
This process does not require that updates to XML avoid all risk of introducing semantic changes to existing RFCs. Instead, it only requires that the RSWG carefully consider the potential for semantic changes, take steps to understand the risk of a semantic change (either deliberate or inadvertent), and to limit those risks.¶
When the XML for an existing RFC is updated, the updated XML becomes the canonical version of that RFC.¶
When RFC XML is updated, the updated version of the document shall be archived in addition to the existing version.¶
This document does not specify how archives are maintained or how archived XML might be located or identified.¶
Publication formats are produced from the XML format. As XML changes, publication formats necessarily change, even if this might not result in observable differences. Similarly, as production tools change, publication formats can be regenerated to ensure a consistent presentation across the series.¶
Publication formats -- or the contexts in which they are displayed -- can optionally provide additional details of the specific XML version that they were generated from, or provide a means to discover alternative renderings.¶
This document does not stipulate whether production formats are archived.¶
The RSWG are responsible for managing the risk of semantic changes that would affect the interpretation of existing and future RFCs. Changes to content that has security implications would have security-relevant consequences.¶
This document has no IANA actions.¶
Thanks to Paul Hoffman, John Levine, Pete Resnick, and Alexis Rossi for constructive discussions about how the evolution of the RFC XML format might be managed.¶