XSF Discussion - 2021-09-21

Wouldn't it be nicer to have an overview page at https://xmpp.org/rfcs which would list and describe relevant (XMPP) RFCs, and link individual RFC documents to datatracker.ietf.org instead? This would surely minimize maintenance effort and improve presentation of RFCs.

Relevant issue https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/issues/414

It certainly would

oh yes

https://xmpp.org/extensions/ does link to the RFCs, but not any more to our nice and fancy XEP-style rendering

Why did you take that away from us?

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6120.html is eye cancer and an accessibility nightmare

ITYM the worst RFC rendering to-date :-X

jonas’: you are using your browser wrong.

I saw that terrible rendering on some IETF pages too in the past, but I always try to get away from that as fast as possible.

unless you are also talking about the official rendering being the worst

oh, no, that one's (to be clear: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6120.html) the most readable rendering of RFCs I've seen so far.

MattJ: would it be okay to provide /rfcs from hugo?

jonas’: so you never tried to read RFCs on a mobile device.

Ge0rG, I see the drawbacks, but the rendering of the XSF had terrible <hr/> between sections and a way too small font size. It was all around ugly. I would've fixed that, but nobody could tell me how to re-render the RFCs, so I never did.

wurstsalat, yes, I don't see why not. But there are a bunch there - as long as they are all still accessible easily, it doesn't really matter how we serve them

https://uc.xmpp.zombofant.net/e6a86707-0244-41ed-a18e-c0d288be27ad/LmPKWnpET4-848SPFf6Bag.jpg

Sigh. I give up.

Ge0rG, more productive would be to find a way to re-render the RFCs.

jonas’: I presume it's based on some rfc xml v1 syntax converter or somesuch.

From source xml we no longer have?

I'm sure the XML is available from the IETF tools

generator="xml2rfc v1.36 (http://xml.resource.org/)"

like this one? https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.xml

MattJ: accessible as in "this link still resolves: https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6122.html " or accessible by clicking a link at /rfcs ? My idea was to replace these self-hosted ones with ietf-hosted ones (?)

Oh I see

I much prefer our rendering :)

I use it all the time

I'm with MattJ here. You can't replace text reflow with anything.

The IETF-rendering gives me the choice between unreadable font size and constant horizontal scrolling, so I just don't

https://cerdale.zash.se/s/rQTPrSlUEe0IcGAA/b3p_rdtgRTGBElmbFp4Szg.jpg

https://uc.xmpp.zombofant.net/2c985f37-94fa-4be1-8e65-ebbe88d5eadd/7AEoEbK8SnWPbBkRqt3uLA.jpg

Ge0rG, you were saying unreadable font size?

https://cerdale.zash.se/s/8BjeoqvC2ABVpBQb/D90QZ3EXT3axww8xDzIfrg.jpg

Fennec does a decent job, TIL

my screenshot was with fennec :/

If only it didn't do like 2fps

jonas’: should I guide you through the font size settings in fennec?

Ge0rG, no, *all* other pages are fine.

Just now I see there even is an index file in /rfcs https://xmpp.org/rfcs/index.shtml Maybe I'll start by building a hugo page which replaces that index, then add further (non xmpp.org hosted RCFs)

it's just our broken rendering

jonas’: BTW, you can use "reader mode" of fennec for our rendering, but not for the IETF rendering

I don't trust reader mode anymore. It drops content sometimes.

wurstsalat, right, that's what I thought you meant at first, sorry :)

The directory listing is functional, but it could be better

jonas’: so fixing our font size will be 10 times better than dropping our rendering

Ge0rG, and then removing the <hr/>.

wurstsalat: that's a great idea

Ge0rG, and, yes.

I looked into that though, IIRC, and it was all px based or some similar terror

and then I closed it.

jonas’: well, if it makes your eyes bleed, then remove it :)

All that meta tag that fixes all mobile issues?

Re-rendering RFCs for xmpp.org would also offer to update their life cycle ;) 6122 for example https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/issues/382 I guess this concerns multiple RFCs on xmpp.org

THis would also make https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/947 obsolete.

I only made this PR because my previous attempts at figuring our RFC rendering process all ended up in failure.

maybe there could be both: linking to datatracker.ietf.org in all content pages on xmpp.org (readers can choose how they like to read: txt, html, pdf, etc), and then have xmpp.org/rfcs with a nice index page linking both xmpp.org hosted RFCs and ietf versions. this way we could keep the xmpp.org hosted RFC renderings for convenient reading, but also link to the up to date RFCs at ietf.org

Or even better, make all content RFC links link to the new page at xmpp.org/rfcs#anchor

I like this suggestion

jonas’: > Merged #1106 into master. Yaay.

https://spacecloud.one/upload/186caa17-bb7d-4ef8-88c9-c2ed149963e2/rfcs-1.png

my first attempt. suggestions?

Really nice!!!

both ietf.org and (if they exist) xmpp.org versions are shown

👌

should this list _all_ xmpp related RFCs ? there are quite a lot, I learned

That would be much better than the current situation, where only some of them are listed. ^^

I am fine when it can be sorted and filtered somehow maybe. bit I am also fine to list all that are related. Because well thats it ✏

You don't have to do everything at once 🙂

It is an awesome attempt of you Daniel! 😍

But you're not the only one not aware of all RFCs, so seems of value to have such an overview

maybe we can have the overview first and then link to a sorted page with all of it?

well, filtering and sorting is not possible at the moment. but each RFC has an anchor by which it can be linked: xmpp.org/rfcs#6122 would navigate directly to that specific RFC including summary and further links

we could use those on content pages elsewhere on xmpp.org

Interesting

wurstsalat: whats the issue?