Hi Antoine, Unfortunately, we are unable to create outputs with the XML provided (you can use authors-tools.ietf.org to see the error warnings if you like).
Mostly the errors seem to be due to the use of the aasvg —stretch flag, which places the invalid attributes textLength and lengthAdjust in the SVG. If you could update and resubmit to us, we’d appreciate it. Thank you. Megan Ferguson RFC Production Center > On Apr 14, 2026, at 4:15 AM, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear Megan, > > We have batched all the updates in the enclosed XML file. This includes the > updated ASCII art / SVG as discussed. > > Let us know if you are happy with the remaining rfced opens. > > Best, > Antoine (on behalf of the authors) > > From: Megan Ferguson <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2026 00:49 > To: Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Birkholz, Henk > <[email protected]>; Cedric Fournet <[email protected]>; > Yogesh Deshpande <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected]<[email protected]>; Amaury Chamayou > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected]<[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9943 > <draft-ietf-scitt-architecture-22> for your review > [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why > this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > Antoine, > > Thank you for your reply and guidance. > > We have updated this document with Cédric’s responses to our cluster-wide > queries (see our other mail) as well as your responses to the > document-specific questions. We had a few follow-up questions/comments > related to the document-specific questions marked with [rfced] below (all > resolved issues have been removed). > > > > On Mar 27, 2026, at 8:23 AM, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > 2) <!--[rfced] We had the following questions related to SVG used > > > throughout the document:> a) Please review our update to Figure 1 from > > > "3rd-party" to > > > "third-party". It looks like making this change may have affected the > > > spacing of that sentence. Please regenerate.The SVG is generated > > > automatically from this source ASCII syntax: > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fietf-wg-scitt%2Fdraft-ietf-scitt-architecture%2Fblob%2Fmain%2Fdraft-ietf-scitt-architecture.md%3Fplain%3D1%23L209We&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664103542%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tHKXrUpIiG4nVMHFQMB5Ta8n6jsBnnzQLWTNdqwWCII%3D&reserved=0 > > > can update this and generate a new one, is the correct way to proceed to > > > do that and publish a new draft incorporating this change, or to send the > > > a separate SVG file by email? > > [rfced] We can do it by email. It may be best to wait until AUTH48 completes > to avoid multiple iterations. We have noted the two changes requested to SVG > at the AUTH48 status page (see link below). > > > > b) We note that the text within at least one (maybe more) of the SVG > > > figures is not able to be selected. Is it possible to modify the SVG > > > using your preferred SVG editing software to improve the rendering of > > > the string in the SVG?We have used > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmartinthomson%2Faasvg&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664123956%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vtjFqeUgO5D%2FyTAIxDdT%2FBLI81zxGUqd9Jk6a4lOLzs%3D&reserved=0to > > > produce the svg. > > We are not sure what issue you are referring to, we are able to select the > > text in the figures, could you clarify? > > [rfced] The SVG seems to have the following limitations: > > 1) When looking at the PDF version in my browser, searching two-word terms in > the SVG does not result in a hit (e.g., "Falsification" results in a hit but > "Falsification of” does not). > > 2) When attempting to copy and paste from one of the SVG figures in the PDF > version in my browser, I can select text, but often too much text is > highlighted or not the line I am going for. > > If you used aasvg, perhaps you could tweak the 'spaces' attribute to improve > search and selectability? This seems to be an issue with kramdown-rfc's > default sometimes -- and seems likely here based on how the following looks: > > <text x="224" y="404">Falsification</text> > <text x="292" y="404">of</text> > <text x="324" y="404">test</text> > <text x="376" y="404">results</text> > > > > > > > 3) <!--[rfced] We had the following questions/comments related to the > > > Terminology section: > > > > > > a) We have moved the following paragraph to appear directly before the > > > list of terms defined in this document as the terms borrowed from > > > other documents (e.g., "header") are not capitalized in the text. We > > > have also changed "corresponding" to "following" for clarity. Please > > > review and let us know any objections. > > > > > > Original: > > > When used in text, the corresponding terms are capitalized. To > > > ensure readability, only a core set of terms is included in this > > > section. > > > > > > Current: > > > When used in text, the following terms are capitalized. To > > > ensure readability, only a core set of terms is included in this > > > section.We propose the following additional clarification:Current: > > When used in text in the sense defined, the following terms are > > capitalized. To ensure readability, only a core set of terms is > > included in this section. > > > [rfced] Just noting that the additional sentence you suggest above in (a) > actually resolves our question (b) (that was not included in your mail). We > will consider question (b) resolved unless we hear otherwise. > > > > > > > > > b) We believe To Be Signed Bytes should be made To-Be-Signed Bytes to > > > match the use in the Terminology section. If this is the case, please > > > update and regenerate the SVG.We agree, should we push a new draft, or > > > send the SVG separately? > > [rfced] Just noting that this would be another SVG update as mentioned above. > > > > > > > 11) <!-- [rfced] The reference entries for [SPDX-CBOR] and > > > [SPDX-JSON] are identical. Should these references be condensed > > > down into one reference?They should be condensed down to one reference. > [rfced] Please review our update to use [SPDX-CBOR] only and let us know any > objections. > > Please review our updates in the files posted below carefully as we do not > make updates once the documents are published as RFCs. > > The files have been posted here (please refresh): > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664134714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vakdFWzxegYxmxdYKfH2x9b5nfmrQYo1HOMrtTW4ykc%3D&reserved=0 > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664145661%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tDln2V8SDew6UTEGMAKq%2F6FyBLopijS5OVrz9B6li9Q%3D&reserved=0 > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943.html&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664156480%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CgA8rx9%2FvOE0PRvFOmx00AS8w1X08T8uA4Mdc9SMuM4%3D&reserved=0 > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943.xml&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664167026%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=qNHr8OT%2BAekazq7ZlTiC8t7Kss%2Fxx6U3%2FC0VgA67UOM%3D&reserved=0 > > The diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943-diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664179726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Er5V0rbFfw2n%2B6XXfpS7oAV1gflj%2B3g06gPb%2FWmwPtw%3D&reserved=0 > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664190567%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rHlssJwAb1S5psCbYIGZwnR0IE3kTEhdOR1eK2yccIY%3D&reserved=0 > (side by side) > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664201109%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=12y1hmuhL%2BQGVY9Q%2F9eJJGe%2FschDnisjsAYFB%2BOnfmM%3D&reserved=0 > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9943-auth48rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664211677%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Et2NKX2eSWx%2FpB6jgT5xkCyWyJJVpvf2u2bIZ4LL1%2BQ%3D&reserved=0 > (side by side) > > The AUTH48 status page is viewable here: > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9943&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664222063%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zSA1hSK7sHvUadkm9qZCyQiuswPg1dbe%2BstRuMios58%3D&reserved=0 > > Further cluster information is viewable here: > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fcluster_info.php%3Fcid%3DC557&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7C6c992a7bcb77482aa15208de90496c74%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C639106842664232754%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RSoV05Im50g6h4pIAOzMfkePSUI7xw9fKW8TUSDFC1Q%3D&reserved=0 > > Thank you. > > Megan Ferguson > RFC Production Center > > > <rfc9943.xml> -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
