[rfc-i] Pagination requirements

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Thu May 24 10:39:50 PDT 2012


On 5/24/12 11:17 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/24/2012 8:31 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 5/24/12 9:21 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
>>
>>> a usable printout is more important than a pretty phone display.
>>
>> Staying at the level of dueling opinions, I find it passing strange that
>> the *Internet* Engineering Task Force would optimize for print. IMO the
>> ability to view our specifications on a myriad of devices connected to
>> the Internet is more important than a usable printout.
>>
>> Peter
> 
> There are good reasons:
> 
> a) specs and docs are still printed out
> 
> b) I'm not claiming it's *more* important, but that we should be very
> careful about trading inconvenience on one device for inconvenience on
> another.

That statement puzzles me a bit. Yes, I do print specs once in a while,
but especially since I was on the IESG and needed to read hundreds of
pages of specs every two weeks, I started to read online all the time
(and yes, sometimes even on my phone during IETF meetings to quickly
check a particular point in a spec while waiting in a hotel lobby). The
current canonical format is so unfriendly in those environments (even on
a "normal" laptop screen) that the inconvenience factor seems to me way
beyond what's acceptable. By constrast, I on those rare occasions when I
do print a spec, I can do so using the .txt version, the tools.ietf.org
HTML format, or a more native HTML format (xml2html output, W3C HTML
format, XSF HTML format) with no effective difference in print
quality... in my experience, naturally -- YMMD.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/




More information about the rfc-interest mailing list