[rfc-i] Pagination requirements
"Martin J. Dürst"
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Wed May 30 04:07:03 PDT 2012
On 2012/05/26 0:21, Joe Touch wrote:
> On May 25, 2012, at 12:02 AM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>> On 2012/05/25 3:24, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> I'm not sure then what the problem is with reading these docs on an iPad
>>> - you gave artwork as the reason.
>> Eyesight is another. Some people, in particular younger ones, seem to have eagle's eyes, while others (me more and more included) have limits.
> Speaking as one who shares this frailty, get glasses.
Sorry, I don't need glasses (yet?). I can read 10pt type fine. I just
can't read 6pt type. Using a reflowing format (vs. a fixed format)
significantly increases the range of devices where I can reasonably read
IDs and RFCs. My strong guess is that it has similar benefits for others.
> Or generate "large type" formats - on a large display.
Sorry, but I can't read in bed with a large display (and yes, I
*occasionally* want to read an ID or RFC in bed). I also can't or don't
want to take a large display on a train,...
> I don't think we should muck with formats to avoid an optician.
You seem to be insisting on a lot of details just so that you can write
in a certain way. Why can't you accept that others might want to read in
more ways than the current format easily allows? That feels rather
myopic to me :-).
More information about the rfc-interest