[rfc-i] Internet Draft Format
tbray at textuality.com
Sat Mar 24 17:19:02 PDT 2012
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam at gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't see any justification for the peculiar and unmemorable design
> choices in that particular schema unless the goal was to have the
> functionality of HTML in something that made it imposible to use HTML
> editing tools.
It’s here, it works, it produces highly usable output, and would allow
painless progress toward a bit more internationalization. Those seem
like good arguments to me.
Designing document formats is *hard*; it typically requires a couple
of years' work from an Apps area WG. Even creating a subset of HTML
would be hard and time-consuming. I speak from much bitter
experience. Let’s take a few baby steps right now and try to hit
80/20 points. Specifically, expand the character repertoire for
examples and names, and make the HTML output a first-class citizen.
Easy, fast and no downside.
If someone wants to charter a WG to define a new authoring format
(presumably an XHTML subset) I promise to show up and contribute. But
there's no need to defer all progress till that is done.
More information about the rfc-interest