[rfc-i] How "modern" word processors do it
touch at isi.edu
Sat May 26 09:18:45 PDT 2012
On May 26, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On 5/26/12 9:26 AM, "Joe Touch" <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
>> I refute claims to the need for editing operations - whether editing the doc,
>> or editing across docs.
> Could you at least say more about why you mean by the word "editing",
> please? It seems like it means something radically different to you than it
> means to me -- for me it connotes modification.
Also copying that retains structure to paste into another document - this RFC, an I-D being written, or *anything* else, including email.
Editing can be useful enough without full document structure.
Here's a good example of something that container editing won't allow:
The interface between TCP and lower level protocol is essentially
unspecified except that it is assumed there is a mechanism whereby the
two levels can asynchronously pass information to each other.
Typically, one expects the lower level protocol to specify this
interface. TCP is designed to work in a very general environment of
interconnected networks. The lower level protocol which is assumed
throughout this document is the Internet Protocol .
As noted above, the primary purpose of the TCP is to provide reliable,
securable logical circuit or connection service between pairs of
processes. To provide this service on top of a less reliable internet
communication system requires facilities in the following areas:
I just grabbed part of two different containers. That can be useful for context. Why prevent it?
More information about the rfc-interest