[rfc-i] Containment considered harmful
jhildebr at cisco.com
Sun May 27 00:15:24 PDT 2012
On 5/27/12 12:56 AM, "Joe Touch" <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
> Word 2010 is outdated?
When producing HTML, apparently, as evidenced by its output.
>> I don't think you've shown that there's a big difference in cost for a
>> competent programmer.
> Show us all your competence by providing those tools - including a
> full-featured visual editor - for your solution then.
Working on it.
> Or are you intending to set us up for a "solution for which a program exists,
> but the margin of this email is too small to show it"?
Nope. And again, thank you for the condescending tone. I apologize for
being so infuriating to you that you feel the need to lash out.
I also apologize for continuing to harp on your manners. However, I'm going
to continue to insist that you treat everyone on the list with respect.
> Right. Except that in being not simpler, you are intending to support future
> tools and future uses.
Yes. So that the people that come along 40 years from now have a path
forward from what we build between now and then. When those folks are
arguing with the old-timer HTML folks, hopefully they'll at least have the
data they need to translate the format we're talking about here into
whatever crazy stuff they've come up with.
Attempts at forward compatibility seem like a reasonable goal for a
long-term archival format.
More information about the rfc-interest