[rfc-i] feedback on draft-hoffman-rfcformat-canon-others-00, was: RFC Format - final requirements and next steps

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Fri May 18 09:26:33 PDT 2012


On May 18, 2012, at 8:47 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 18 May 2012, at 17:35 , Paul Hoffman wrote:
> 
>>> I would prefer that CR/NL/LF/TAB are allowed but treated as a single space.
>>> Isn't that how they are treated in *ML anyway?
> 
>> So, let me drill down a bit here. Why should that be in the *canonical* version of the RFC, instead of in one of the additional versions provided by the RFC Editor? That is, what advantage do you see in having a canonical version with lines wrapped?
> 
> Many tools that display text will not wrap lines in a nice way, and often not at all.
> 
> Being able to do "cat rfc12345.*" or open the file in a browser and have it display in a reasonable way would be good.


You are not answering the question above. Why do you need to be able to display the *canonical* version on dumb tools when there are perfectly displayable alternative versions that are retrieved the same way? Your answer is silly in that you also can't "cat rfc12345.pdf" and get any meaningful result.

--Paul Hoffman



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list