[rfc-i] [IAB Trac] #266: Requirement for "Clear Printing"
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Feb 19 00:16:39 PST 2013
On 18/02/2013 17:13, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
> On 2/17/13 1:17 AM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
>> On 16/02/2013 22:49, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>>> Conversely, why should the canonical format be required to support page
>> I think Ran already answered that - for unambiguous ease of reference
>> (especially if a document happens to contain very long sections that
>> span more than one page).
> If you made the requirement "capability for fine-grained references", you
> would be speaking requirements language instead of implementation language.
OK, what I mean (and I suspect Ran too) is:
"capability for fine-grained references when working with a printable format."
That's old-fashioned, I know. However, you are advocating fine-grained
references via anchors, which is:
"capability for fine-grained references when working with a hypertext format."
The question before the house is whether we want both of these, or only one.
Hmm. This is the same discussion I must have had in 1980 with TBL, when he
showed me the Enquire program as an alternative to software documentation
printed on a Diabolo.
More information about the rfc-interest