[rfc-i] Requirement for "clear printing"
ole at cisco.com
Wed Feb 20 11:02:52 PST 2013
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Martin Rex wrote:
> Now the problem I have with this is that it wastes tons of
> engineering resources on waste of the eye-candy type.
Notice that I said "...evolution of the RFC Series and vis a vis
other SDOs." Sounds like you are arguing for ASCII art and
discouraging anything else. Leaving aside what might constitute
"eye candy" and what the IETF should be spending its energy on
(both good topics :-) let's just observe that:
* RFCs have page numbers now
* It is at least possible that someone might say "see page 4 of RFC
1234" (had to check that one myself first)
* Given the above, would it be reasonable to completely remove page
numbers from all future RFCs and not have the "printed version"
option available (with page numbers)?
> It is also important that updating existing standards remains similarily
> easy, e.g. re-using 90% of an existing document and just changing or
> adding 10%. For this to remain possible, the canonical&normative
> format of the I-D and/or RFC needs to remain sufficiently "clean"
> that it can be easily reauthored with existing user-friendly authoring
> solutions like NRoffEdit.
Yes, I agree with that, I was asking (not stating a requirement) about
an evolution. Lot's of words have been written about support for
various screen sizes and devices, this doesn't (necessarily) mean a
complete elimination of something approaching traditional theories
about readability and layout/design for SOME version of the documents.
Again, I am not arguing for specific requirements here, I just don't
want the matter to go un-noticed in our march for a new format.
More information about the rfc-interest