[rfc-i] RFC format: any discussions at the Paris IETF?

Dave Crocker dhc at dcrocker.net
Mon Feb 27 10:04:58 PST 2012

As is typical for these discussions, the tendency is to offer or reject specific 
solutions, without really attending to basic requirements.

Tim's note was a nice exception.  The capability that he suggests, which is 
notably not easily provided for the current .txt format, is reflowing.

And for reference, I support an effort to satisfy that target.

There are other such enhancements that we should consider, in terms of 
capabilities, not specific solutions.


On 2/26/2012 7:35 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Joe Touch<touch at isi.edu>  wrote:
>> FWIW, my point is that a form that doesn't have a WYSIWYG editor is, IMO,
>> DOA.
> I wasn't aware of any authoring technology in which What You See
> (while writing) will approximate What You Get (while reading) on a
> 3.5" handset, a 7" tablet, a 10" tablet, an Amazon Kindle, a 11"
> MacBook Air, the 30" monitor often found on often office desktops, US
> letter-size paper, and European A4.  If there is such a technology,
> please do enlighten me.   If there is not, can we please stop basing
> arguments based on empirically nonexistent technologies, just as we do
> not base them on the behavior of the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny.

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list