[rfc-i] Character sets, was Comments on draft-iab-rfcformat
hallam at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 16:49:22 PST 2012
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Martin Rex <mrex at sap.com> wrote:
> Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> > Why does normative text need to be displayable on every machine?
> Why NOT?
The example was a router. I have never once read an RFC on the display of a
Are you suggesting I should be able to read RFCs on my Nike Powerband ?
> Not being able to discuss normative text on an IETF mailing list
> because it can not be represented in a plain-ASCII EMail would be
> just as bad as not being able to display an RFC through a
> plain SSH tty-based dialin, or discussed in f2f meetings.
> Everything outside outside of US-ASCII is a barrier to comprehension
> for various communication scenarios.
> And the same KISS principle applies in order to keep our documents
> highly "accessible" to those, where the limitations are not caused
> by the favorite physical computing environment, but by reduced
> vision, hearing or both capabilities.
> For many years there has been the possibility to publish an RFC
> in an additional format with colorful text, fancy type faces and sizes,
> graphics and all. Considering how rarely it is used, there evidently
> is no signficant demand, and neither is there necessity.
> For those who do have an urge, the possibility to publish an alternative
> document *IS* already there. Stop whining and *USE* it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest