[rfc-i] Illustrations, graphics, and normative-ness

Olaf Kolkman olaf at NLnetLabs.nl
Fri Apr 27 00:11:09 PDT 2012


On Apr 26, 2012, at 5:05 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

>> 
>> Observing that there is a trend of authors and readers of RFCs towards less and less native English speakers the utility of an illustration should not be underestimated. While not normative, illustrations might help preventing misinterpretations.
> 
> Whoa, whoa, whoa. I have been assuming up to this point that we were talking about illustrations and graphics as normative parts of the RFC. It sounds like I made a bad assumption.


No, I think I made that bad assumption.


--Olaf


________________________________________________________ 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20120427/ca5a68de/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: E-mail-Signature-NLnetLabs-smaller.png
Type: image/png
Size: 11929 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20120427/ca5a68de/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20120427/ca5a68de/attachment.sig>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list