Network Working Group P. Hoffman Internet-Draft VPN Consortium Intended status: Informational T. Hansen, Ed. Expires: April 12, 2015 AT&T Laboratories October 9, 2014 Examples of the 'XML2RFC' Version 2 and 3 Vocabularies draft-hoffman-rfcexamples-00 Abstract This document gives examples of use of the "XML2RFC" vocabulary. The examples cover both version 2 and version 3. The purposes of this draft it to give authors of Internet Drafts examples of how to use the XML vocabularies, and to show how use of the version 2 vocabulary will change with version 3. Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor) Discussion of this draft takes place on the rfc-interest mailing list (rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org), which has its home page at [1]. Status of This Memo 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 http://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 April 12, 2015. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2014 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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 1] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014 publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Example of a v2 Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. Example of a v3 Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1. Introduction This document gives examples of use of the "XML2RFC" vocabulary. The examples cover both version 2 [XML2RFCv2] and version 3 [XML2RFCv3]. Some of the examples are given to help authors use parts of the vocabulary common to both versions (called "v2" and "v3" in this document), while others appear in order to help authors transitioning from version 2 to version 3 to see how features from the earlier version relate to features in the later version. This document currently only has one main example, which shows the commonly-used XML elements. A future version of the document may have a more complete example, and will very likely have topic- specific examples (such as lists, tables, and so on). 2. Example of a v2 Document The following is a v2 document that has all the elements that are needed for typical Internet Drafts. ]> An Exmaple of Using XML for an Internet Draft Examplecorp
123 Exemplar Way Anytown California 95060 US +1 123-456-7890 chrissmith@example.com
jk@lmn.op
General Imaginary WG XML Imagination This is an example of an abstract. It is a short paragraph that gives an overview of the document in order to help the reader determine whether or not they are interested in reading further. Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 3] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014
This is this is the first paragraph of the introduction to this document. This introduction is probably much shorter than it would be for a real Internet Draft. Something to note about this paragraph is that it has a pointer to , and one to , both of which appear later in the document.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in .
This is a reference to . Actually, the reference itself is not all that interesting, but the way that the reference is incorporated is. Note that the inclusion of RFC 2119 was done at the top of the XML, while the information for RFC 6949 is done directly in the references section.
Bulleted lists are good for items that are not ordered: Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 4] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014 This is the first item. This is the second item. Here comes a sub-list: This is the first sub-item. This is the second sub-item This is the item after the sub-list. Numbered lists are good for items that are ordered: This is the first item. This is the second item. Here comes a sub-list: This is the first sub-item. This is the second sub-item This is the item after the sub-list.
The following is a figure with a caption. Also, it uses the ampersand (&) and less than (<) characters in the example text. Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 5] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014
The ampersand (&) and the less than (<) are two characters that need escaping.
None.
There are no security considerations for an imaginary Internet Draft.
Some of the things included in this draft came from Elwyn Davies' templates.
&RFC2119; RFC Series Format Requirements and Future Development
3. Example of a v3 Document The following is a v3 document that has all the elements that are needed for typical Internet Drafts. It was converted from the example in Section 2. An Exmaple of Using XML for an Internet Draft Examplecorp
123 Exemplar Way Anytown California 95060 US +1 123-456-7890 chrissmith@example.com
Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 7] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014
jk@lmn.op
General Imaginary WG XML Imagination This is an example of an abstract. It is a short paragraph that gives an overview of the document in order to help the reader determine whether or not they are interested in reading further.
Introduction This is this is the first paragraph of the introduction to this document. This introduction is probably much shorter than it would be for a real Internet Draft. Something to note about this paragraph is that it has a pointer to , and one to , both of which appear later in the document.
Terminology The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 8] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014 .
The Protocol Being Described This is a reference to . Actually, the reference itself is not all that interesting, but the way that the reference is incorporated is. Note that the inclusion of RFC 2119 was done at the top of the XML, while the information for RFC 6949 is done directly in the references section.
Basic Lists Bulleted lists are good for items that are not ordered:
  • This is the first item.
  • This is the second item. Here comes a sub-list:
    • This is the first sub-item.
    • This is the second sub-item
  • This is the item after the sub-list.
Numbered lists are good for items that are ordered:
  1. This is the first item.
  2. Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 9] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014
  3. This is the second item. Here comes a sub-list:
    1. This is the first sub-item.
    2. This is the second sub-item
  4. This is the item after the sub-list.
Figures The following is a figure with a caption. Also, it uses the ampersand (&) and less than (<) characters in the example text.
This could be haiku The ampersand (&) and the less than (<) are two characters that need escaping.
IANA Considerations None.
Security Considerations There are no security considerations for an imaginary Internet Draft. Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 10] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014
Acknowledgements Some of the things included in this draft came from Elwyn Davies' templates.
RFC Series Format Requirements and Future Development
4. Security Considerations The examples in this document do not introduce any new security considerations. Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 11] Internet-Draft RFC XML Examples October 2014 5. IANA Considerations There are no IANA considerations for this document. 6. Acknowledgments The ideas for the examples in this document come from many people over a long period of time. 7. Normative References [XML2RFCv2] Reschke, J., "The 'XML2RFC' version 2 Vocabulary", draft- reschke-xml2rfc (work in progress), 2014. [XML2RFCv3] Hoffman, P., "The 'XML2RFC' version 3 Vocabulary", draft- hoffman-xml2rfc (work in progress), 2014. Authors' Addresses Paul Hoffman VPN Consortium EMail: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Tony Hansen (editor) AT&T Laboratories 200 Laurel Ave. South Middletown, NJ 07748 USA EMail: tony+rfcv3@maillennium.att.com Hoffman & Hansen Expires April 12, 2015 [Page 12]