- changed status to open
Migration - Wrong version of xml2rfc being used to render HTML? (by mbj)
Issue #935
duplicate
It looks like you’re building this with the new xml2rfc. I’d use the old one at http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/old.html so the result is consistent with our other specs.
Comments (3)
-
reporter
-
I believe that this issue is superseded by issue
#945, which contains a more general description of the issue. -
- changed status to duplicate
Duplicate of
#945. - Log in to comment
- Assignee
- Type
- Priority
- Status
- duplicate
- Component
- Migration
- Milestone
- Implementer's Draft
- Version
- –
- Votes
- 0
- Watchers
- 0
Actually not.
It is using xml2rfc-1.36 OIDF version right now.
The change in the behavior is induced by the directive <?rfc private="Draft" ?> which is actually not good since it should show that it is a WG document and not a private I-D.
When it is approved as implementer's draft, then perhaps we should put <?rfc private="Implementers Draft" ?> in it and recompile, although, if we do not have to use this "private" directive, it is even better.