[rfc-i] Following up from Atlanta
nico at cryptonector.com
Tue Dec 4 09:08:36 PST 2012
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:10 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 2012-12-03 20:32, Nico Williams wrote:
>> I was in the room in Atlanta and wanted to re-state my comments
>> (somewhat modified since Atlanta) on the list for the record:
>> - I would dearly like to retain an Internet-Draft and RFC display form
>> that is amenable to display on text-based terminals.
> Lynx is your friend.
I dislike Lynx and friends. If we can render text, is there any reason not to?
>> - Fixed-width fonts are critical for some things: ascii art, and code,
>> for example.
> Yes. But just for that.
That's a matter of taste and style. I much prefer fixed-width fonts
for nearly everything. Why should we take your preference?
>> - Note that text is probably the most accessible way to render
>> I-Ds and RFCs. This is a great reason to keep text renderings around.
> What exactly do you mean by "render" here? And are you seriously saying
> plain text is more accessible than HTML?
Possibly. I'm sighted, so it's hard for me to tell, but I could
believe it, yes.
More information about the rfc-interest