[rfc-i] Multiple HTML formats, was: RFC Format - final requirements and next steps

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sun May 13 08:42:52 PDT 2012


On May 13, 2012, at 6:24 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 12 May 2012, at 20:11 , Paul Hoffman wrote:
> 
>> why this will be good for people who want to have HTML versions of RFCs, namely that we can have multiple HTML formats to meet different needs.
> 
> Can you explain?
> 
> I would consider it a flaw in the HTML format if additional HTML formats are desired. HTML is extremely flexible, and can be made to anything we could reasonably want through the application of CSS. Or am I overlooking something?


There are different ways to do the same thing in HTML. Tables can be formatted in different ways to cause or avoid line breaks in cells. What you wrap around preformatted text can vary. Metadata for document parts can be encoded in many ways. None of this is a criticism: HTML works a heck of a lot better for most things than plain text.

If you have just one format of HTML, you end up with many people underserved unless they do their own transformation before reading the HTML. It would be better to let the RFC Editor create all the HTML formats that the RFC reading community wants.

--Paul Hoffman



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list