[rfc-i] draft-hildebrand-html-rfc

Yoav Nir ynir at checkpoint.com
Sun Jul 8 06:44:02 PDT 2012


On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

> Chrome auto updates. So legacy is much less of an issue.

Agree for Chrome, but IE is not like that (IE8 is the last version to run on XP, IE10 won't run on Win7 maybe), and even Safari has support only since version 5.1. I don't have much of a problem telling people to use something that works - Firefox works and is available for all platforms, and Opera seems to work too. But mobile browsers are not always upgradable.

> Kind of weak that one of the core objectives for HTML I worked on at
> CERN in 1993, i.e. being able to present academic papers of the type
> used by physicists is still not supported in the commodity browsers.

The focus of HTML has shifted.

> I think time to just start using the feature and shame Google into
> supporting the standard. That is how we got tables, Netscape was
> dragging its feet until I asked Taher if their problem was that their
> HTML widget guy hadn't got the chops for it. Eric delivered about 48
> hours later.

The have so far not been shamed into supporting TLS 1.1 and 1.2. How many people want to use MathML?

Yoav

> 
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir at checkpoint.com> wrote:
>> That's pretty nice.
>> 
>> Could you post the source HTML?  The one at the link is tooled with all the CSS needed to display it.
>> 
>> Reading the draft, I think the HTML is still going to be more verbose than XML2RFC. OTOH HTML can handle images, formulas and tables now, whereas it would be an extension to XML2RFC.
>> 
>> Regarding format for formulas, I think it will be a while before we can rely on MathML. Testing against http://www.mathjax.org/demos/mathml-samples/ , I see that Firefox and Safari can handle MathML, but IE and Chrome (the two most popular browsers these days) don't, so at least for now, it's a non-starter.  SVG might work better.
>> 
>> Yoav
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 8, 2012, at 1:09 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
>> 
>>> I just submitted a -00 draft of a potential HTML format for RFCs.
>>> 
>>> The version you want to read is here:
>>> 
>>> http://cursive.net/draft-hildebrand-html-rfc-2012-07-07.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The version I submitted is a total cop-out, for which I apologize; I'm
>>> working on auto-conversion from HTML to xml2rfc now, but wanted to make
>>> sure I got *something* submitted.
>>> 
>>> If you'd like to look at the tooling I used to produce this, there is a
>>> github project at:
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/IETF-Formatters/html-rfc
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The idea is you write some HTML, run "idemponit" on what you have, and you
>>> get conformant HTML out the other side.  There is a directory of changes
>>> in "/nits" that are run against the input; writing new nits should be easy
>>> if you've got some basic HTML and jQuery skills.
>>> 
>>> There's also a tool called "rfcq" that allows you to query information out
>>> of the HTML, using jQuery selector syntax.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Joe Hildebrand
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rfc-interest mailing list
>>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>>> 
>>> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Website: http://hallambaker.com/
> 
> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list