[rfc-i] illustrations & equations rare: extra overhead for creating them acceptable
yaakov_s at rad.com
Wed Mar 28 04:24:52 PDT 2012
> Opinion: Illustrations and equations should continue to be very rare:
> Because: Reviewers must review the legibility of the document without the illustration,
> and the equivalence of the illustration to the non-illustration text.
Disagree. A good picture is worth a thousand lines of pseudocode.
Reviewers will get used to them tout de suite.
> Opinion: extra overhead for creators of illustrations and equations is OK
> Because: they are (and should remain) rare.
> No matter what technology is used to display, they're not usually edited "by hand" anyway.
> There are numerous tools for creating and converting to (perhaps not for editing of) mathml / svg
Most people I have spoken with put together ASCII art by hand
(although most have tried tools once or twice).
> Opinion: equations and diagrams should have accessible alt-text / longdescs
> Because: needed for accessibility, for creating text-only renditions.
OK. Although in many cases low-res text renditions may be produced form logical representations.
> Observation: diagrams and equations don't work well on small-screen devices, no matter what file format
> (ASCII art, PDF, jpeg, SVG, whatever), unless the diagrams and equations are really small.
Don't work well - maybe. But DO work, just may require some zooming and panning.
ASCII art just doesn't work.
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest