[rfc-i] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt

Thomas Clausen ietf at thomasclausen.org
Tue Jun 24 09:17:32 PDT 2014


On Jun 24, 2014, at 18:13, Elwyn Davies <elwynd at folly.org.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 2014-06-24 at 16:59 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2014-06-24 16:55, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/24/2014 7:48 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>> On 2014-06-24 16:35, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/24/2014 4:04 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
>>>>>> This does appear to convert plain text from normative to close to
>>>>>> useless.
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm particularly concerned about the notion that figures that aren't
>>>>> available as ASCII-art will be resolved using URLs.
>>>> 
>>>> Do you have a better suggestion?
>>> 
>>> Either provide an ASCII-art version of the figure or *require* that the
>>> descriptive text is normative and that the figure is supplemental only.
>> 
>> AFAIU, the latter is the intent, but I'm not sure whether this has been 
>> captured in any RSE document yet.
>> 
>>> ...
> 
> Presumably this means that we are stuck with producing ASCII art
> versions for some diagrams where it would be tedious to say everything
> in words.  Protocol field diagrams and architecture block diagrams seem
> to be two prime examples. 
> 
> At present, I think we treat protocol field diagrams as normative at
> least for the order of fields and to some extent for layout of fields
> even if we don't have this idea written down.  We never (or at least
> hardly ever) explicitly say that the words define the order of fields;
> nor do the words say what bit positions fields have in the overall
> protocol packet.
> 
> If I have understood correctly and we have to continue doing ASCII art
> or add in many more words for such cases, I am not sure this is a gain.
> 
> Maybe the protocol field diagram is amenable to a specification language
> that will generate the ASCII art or some SVG alternative according to
> output rendering.
> 
> Message flow diagrams and architecture/structure block diagrams are more
> difficult.
> 
> I am sure there must be tools out there that will do most of this
> already.

Elwyn,

Not sure if you are aware of it, but I do use this, for the occasions where I am feeling lazy and have a supported environment (Java VM) at hand:

	http://www.jave.de

Then, I pretty-print it by hand.

Thomas

> 
> Regards,
> Elwyn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20140624/82571ddc/attachment.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list