[Cscwg-public] Pandocifying and RFC 3647-ing the CSBRs

Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) dzacharo at harica.gr
Wed Jun 30 18:00:03 UTC 2021

Hi Corey,

Thanks for preparing the tooling and empty markdown file for the CSBRs.

We have discussed this conversion in the past and I was able to find the 
most recent email 
from the archive. This message contains a conversion matrix that Gerv 
put together when the Forum first converted the BRs into RFC 3647 
format. It would help using that as an initial rule of thumb and fine 
tune afterwards.

Does that help?

I can work with you and other volunteers to convert the current CSBRs 
into markdown and 3647 format.


On 25/6/2021 10:22 μ.μ., Corey Bonnell via Cscwg-public wrote:
> Hello,
> As we discussed recently, it would be good to start progress on moving 
> our CSBRs to Pandoc as well as RFC 3647 format. To start, I updated 
> the code-signing Github repo with integrating the Pandoc tooling 
> support and added the Markdown RFC 3647 template 
> (https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/2 
> <https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/2>). It appears the 
> template document builds correctly, so I think we’re in a good place 
> from a tooling standpoint to start iterating on the document itself.
> I think the next step is to go through the current version of the 
> CSBRs and transfer content from each section into the appropriate 
> section in the RFC 3647 document. I converted the Word document we 
> currently use to Pandoc to facilitate this process (it’s attached to 
> this email). While some of the content transfer will be 
> straightforward, I imagine that other sections will be tricky and 
> non-obvious. Since this effort will likely take a good deal of time, I 
> don’t think we should hold up ballots waiting for this work to complete.
> Given the large scope of work, it would be great to have several 
> people working on this. Additionally, it would be good to hear if 
> anyone has any alternative ideas on how we should go about 
> Pandocifying the CSBRs and moving to RFC 3647 format.
> Perhaps we can schedule some time on the next call to discuss further.
> Thanks,
> Corey
> _______________________________________________
> Cscwg-public mailing list
> Cscwg-public at cabforum.org
> https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/cscwg-public

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/cscwg-public/attachments/20210630/1373096f/attachment.html>

More information about the Cscwg-public mailing list