[rfc-i] "wysiwyg" requirement
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Jan 15 00:51:20 PST 2013
On 2013-01-15 06:52, Martin Rex wrote:
> Tim Bray wrote:
>> Except for, nroff is an outdated tool that has no notion of structural
>> integrity (or actually of structure at all), fosters the illusion that
>> 66-line 80-column monospaced paginated text is anything but an accidental
>> artifact of long-obsolete display technology, and and whose use is rapidly
>> heading into the territory of ?actively harmful?.
>> My problem is that I can?t help thinking of the IETF as (in part) a
>> publisher of high-value intellectual content, and that content deserves
>> better respect than is shown by the use of tools that were second-rate 30
>> years ago.
> Those who try to deveive themselves and others that displaying
> proportional text would be a trivial, long-solved problem, probably
> do not have the slightest clue what they're actually talking about.
> See this information about how much this is still an area of
> research, trial-and-error, frustration, and user&developer dismay
> because things regularly will not work as expected, and in particular
> not in the first few releases of a software:
As far as I can tell, we do not *plan* to *write* software that displays
proportional fonts. We plan to *use* *existing* software.
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest