[rfc-i] illustrations & equations rare: extra overhead for creating them acceptable

[Yaakov Stein]

> 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
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest