[rfc-i] Speaking of presenting RFCs

["Martin J. Dürst"]

On 2012/05/17 4:33, Tim Bray wrote:
> Check out http://pretty-rfc.herokuapp.com
>
> for example http://pretty-rfc.herokuapp.com/RFC3986
>
> Works great on my mobile; even shifts the ToC in and out depending
> whether the phone is in landscape or portrait. A fine piece of work.

Yes indeed. I have a few nits (see below), but it's definitely quite a 
bit better than the red-heavy stuff that one gets from xml2rfc by default.

Regards,    Martin.

Nits, so far:

- Authors shouldn't be numbered.
- Even if we'd prefer not to, I guess we need the copyright/... legal
   stuff :-(
- Lots of useful metainformation is missing (updates/obsoletes, date of 
publication,...)
- For references, the [] are dropped. Sometimes, that may look more 
natural, but in most cases, it results in arbitrary stuff in the middle 
of sentences. It probably also means that it kills some usages of grep 
on extracted text.
- The toc (on the right side) only goes to subsections, does not include 
subsubsections.
- Some explanatory text around figures is indented too much (see 
http://pretty-rfc.herokuapp.com/RFC3986#query for an example). This is 
taken from <preamble> and <postamble>, but because these aren't very 
visibly distinct in the current standard rendering, authors often don't 
distinguish these and plain paragraphs very well.