[rfc-i] New Version Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt
ietf at thomasclausen.org
Tue Jun 24 05:09:20 PDT 2014
On Jun 24, 2014, at 14:00, Ted Lemon <mellon at fugue.com> wrote:
> On Jun 24, 2014, at 7:33 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <Chris.Dearlove at baesystems.com> wrote:
>> Personally, paper is more important than HTML.
> That's fair enough, but your earlier complaint had to do with page numbering, not paper. You can print the PDF to paper, or the HTML for that matter. Arguably the output will be prettier and easier to read. But you will have to rely on section numbers to orient yourself in the document, rather than page numbers.
I’m sure that Chris can hit CTRL-P to print.
Me, I hit Apple-P
We probably use different OSes and different browsers.
But we work together, still - and when I say “Chris, look at page 43 in RFC xxxx”, that’s unambiguous…43 is a code-point that has been recorded by the central authority that is the RFC editor ;) Same argument holds for I-Ds: “Chris, look at page 43 in draft-mumble-07”….
If we do away with the page numbers, then that won’t work.
If we are to rely on section numbers then, effectively, you need to ensure “much smaller sections” than a page to get the same granularity. Which, essentially, becomes inventing yet another rule so as to be able to do what we already can do without it, today….
Not sure that I see the logic. Nor, the problem that page-numbers are causing.
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest