Define an official and standardised I-D authoring Markdown dialect

[JayDaley]

Markdown is now a popular choice for I-D authors, rivalling RFCXML, and there is significant potential to develop its use further. We have two different Markdown processors used for I-D authoring, both provided and actively maintained by community volunteers.

The problems with the current situation are:

• The processors use incompatible dialects of Markdown as one is based on Kramdown and the other based on MultiMark.
• Neither processor is a feature-complete replacement for RFCXML
• Change control of both is entirely down to the developer though community input is actively sought and listened to
• There is significant tension around the IETF authors documentation and whether it should strongly recommend the most widely used processor of the two, or be more circumspect to be fair to both processors.
• If the Tools Team wanted to build any tools to support Markdown authoring then this would likely fragment the situation further, which is a significant barrier to new Markdown support.

All of these problems could be addressed by standardising an official Markdown dialect for I-D authoring in an RFC. This would be a feature-complete replacement of RFCXML, therefore enabling automated bi-directional translation between this standardised Markdown and RFCXML, which in turn could go a long way towards solving the problems with authors struggling with the switch to RFCXML for AUTH48.

This would also support potential new developments such as a Javascript renderer/convertor that can be the basis for new web services or plugins to common developer tools.

The risk is that one or both community members who currently maintain a Markdown processor may choose not to adopt the standard or my choose to cease maintenance of their processor, leading to the Tools Team being obliged to produce its own processor to fill the gap, though this is unlikely to be that large an undertaking.

[paulehoffman]

I'm not convinced we need this policy. As long as some $foo is convertible to the current XML format, we don't need a policy about $foo.

[JayDaley]

Markdown is not just any old $foo - it's close to being the dominant authoring format used by new authors, it is strongly promoted by IETF leadership and is on a strong growth trajectory. Yet the Tools Team hands are tied to do anything to support this given the current situation, without fracturing the landscape even more. I'll take this discussion to the list!