OASIS PKCS 11 TC

 View Only

Conerting standard editing format

  • 1.  Conerting standard editing format

    Posted 03-10-2025 17:20

    Dear committee members,

    At the last meeting we decided I would explore a more git friendly format that we could use to edit future spec versions.

    Specifically I proposed to explore using markdown format which is also mostly friendly to display on github where we are also testing the wiki.

    Last week I spent some time experimenting with this, and copied enough of the current draft to give an idea of what we can achieve with markdown+pandoc to generate pdf and html outputs.

    Attached find two example outputs (see also the note at the end of this post) and here find the source these are base on:

    https://github.com/simo5/oasis-pkcs11/tree/draft-3.3/draft-3.3" style="font-family: Monospace; font-size: 14.666667px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-indent: 0; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0; background-color: #FFFFFF" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://github.com/simo5/oasis-pkcs11/tree/draft-3.3/draft-3.3

    To give some context to people that were not on the meeting here is a personal list of pros/cons that motivates me to pursue this proposal:

    Style and editing

    There are five advantages of using markdown that I care for, and one
    disadvantage that annoys me a little.

    Advantages

    • Split document in smaller manageable parts
    • Can use any text tool you care, don't have to use a heavy program
      like MS Office or Libreoffice.
    • All changes are version controlled, therefore easy to read history
      (when a change was made) and if commit messages are curated also easy
      to find the reason why.
    • Mostly you can focus on content rather then style when working on a
      change, reducing time spent on the mechanics of the change
    • Can easily use text tools that are rather powerful when large changes
      are needed (git grep, sed, etc...);

    Bonus

    • we can enforce a style for test sections via an-auto formatter if we
      care for that

    Disadvantages

    • Formatting is rigid and certainly not as flexible as MS Office
      allows. Making changes to the style may be more complicated and
      sometimes we might have to give up on some "nice" idea because the
      tools do not easily allow what we might like.

    I personally think the disadvantage is minor and all the advantages are
    more important, this is a technical spec not a work of art so, some
    limitation in the styling is also not a big deal to me, but I recognize my
    bias here.

    NOTE: I did not attempt at creating a new style for the document and kept it as close as possible to the current word based document structure.

    If we allow ourselves to change a bit how the document is structured we can get better rendering result. However I already spent some time improving the result compared to the most basic pandoc conversion and I believe we can further improve many aspects of the current rendering even with the current structure.



    ------------------------------
    Simo Sorce
    Red Hat
    ------------------------------

    Attachment(s)

    pdf
    pkcs-spec-v3.3.pdf   215 KB 1 version
    html
    pkcs-spec-v3.3.html   198 KB 1 version