[rfc-i] Use of PDF/A for archiving RFC's
jhildebr at cisco.com
Fri Mar 23 10:52:36 PDT 2012
On 3/23/12 11:39 AM, "Tim Bray" <tbray at textuality.com> wrote:
> Speaking as one of the loudest voices for moving from
> page-formatted-ASCII to HTML+unicode for RFCs... I totally am not in
> favor of any extra effort to include graphics.
> I¹m pretty convinced that if you can¹t how to specify a protocol
> cleanly and comprehensibly in written language, graphics aren¹t gonna
> help you.
> Also, maybe it¹s just me, but I¹ve noticed that in WG debate,
> proposals that come equipped with elaborate structure diagrams or
> flowcharts or whatever tend to have a higher-than-normal likelihood of
> being misinformed, counterproductive, or otherwise just wrong.
Agree. As well, there are likely to be some stuff that people want "images"
for that can be done quite nicely in straight HTML.
What about tables with colspans for describing bit-oriented PDUs like at
(by the way, does anyone have a tool that generates these, or should I whip
More information about the rfc-interest