[rfc-i] diagram issues

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Thu Jun 26 12:01:55 PDT 2014

On 6/26/2014 11:55 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Joe Touch <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
>> FWIW, Word documents I wrote still open, including a paper from
>> 1986and my disseration from 1991.
> So you would argue that we should release RFCs as Word documents?
> This is popular in other SDOs--it's not an unreasonable suggestion
> from that perspective.

IMO, PDF is more appropriate as the released version, but (again IMO) if 
we don't support Word as one possible submission format we're *way* 
behind in the times.

>> I just spoke with a colleague who wanted to post his 1989 PhD
>> dissertation online and cannot because it is in a combination of LaTeX
>> and grap, and he can't recover archival versions of the software
>> compatible with the format he used at the time.
> Huh. To bad it's a binary format that can't trivially be hacked over
> by a sed script to bring it up to date.

LaTeX and grap are both text formats. The problem is that both depend on 
macros or capabilities that would need to be re-implemented, and the 
author didn't archive the full definition of those macros.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list