[rfc-i] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Jun 24 05:02:58 PDT 2014
On 2014-06-24 13:41, Thomas Clausen wrote:
> That does, if you will excuse my violent disagreement, appear like an enormous step backwards in usability: both when writing a specification, when writing an implementation from a specification (especially if actually commenting code), or when reviewing a specification for somebody else, the ability to reference “Page XX line Y” is rather convenient, almost necessary — especially, when collaborating with folks using different output media (of which paper remains an important one, for various reasons….)
> I haven’t printed an RFC or an I-D in a decade - and yet, find both page numbers and line numbers to be paramount.
> With my various set of co-authors, while I do *try* to point to “enumerated sections”, we almost always end up “counting lines on a page” at some point in time. I note that other SDOs actually have printed line-numbers in the margin of (at least, their working/intermediate) documents.
My experience is the opposite; I always end up linking to section
numbers or paragraphs.
> While I have deep respect for the “other goals” that you cite, and I agree that we should support different output devices, I respectfully submit that that has nothing to do with the argument being made.
> I also respectfully submit that those “other goals” perhaps are given too high a priority here, and I wonder who set those priorities?
You may want to read <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6949> which was
published over a year ago, and which represents the outcome of a very
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest