[rfc-i] not just 'lineprinter' (was Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt)

Dearlove, Christopher (UK) chris.dearlove at baesystems.com
Mon Jun 30 04:40:00 PDT 2014


Of course Word not necessary. It just (amusingly) happens to be the fastest for me.

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Information Assurance Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearlove at baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-----Original Message-----
From: rfc-interest [mailto:rfc-interest-bounces at rfc-editor.org] On Behalf Of Riccardo Bernardini
Sent: 30 June 2014 11:09
To: rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] not just 'lineprinter' (was Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt)

----------------------! WARNING ! ---------------------- This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external partner or from the internet.
Consider carefully whether you should click on any links, open any attachments or reply.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
--------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <chris.dearlove at baesystems.com> wrote:
> A heresy, but the minimum effort approach I have to printing the 
> current text format, is to open it in Microsoft Word (which I can do 
> with one right click and select) and print (another couple of clicks).
>
> I’m not trying to defend the current approach on that basis, and I 
> realise that’s completely at variance with everything that’s a good requirement.
> It’s just a convenient hack which I stumbled across by accident. And 
> of course it only works if you happen to use Word.

Well, Word is not necessary at all.  I can do that with any basic editor (e.g., emacs, gedit, jedit, ...), with correct pagination too.
I can also print it directly from my browser with just a Ctl-P.

Best regards,

Riccardo

>
>
>
> --
>
> Christopher Dearlove
>
> Senior Principal Engineer, Information Assurance Group Communications, 
> Networks and Image Analysis Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology 
> Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
>
> chris.dearlove at baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
>
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace 
> Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales 
> No: 1996687
>
>
>
> From: rfc-interest [mailto:rfc-interest-bounces at rfc-editor.org] On 
> Behalf Of Tim Bray
> Sent: 27 June 2014 17:20
> To: Dave CROCKER
> Cc: rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> Subject: Re: [rfc-i] not just 'lineprinter' (was Re: Fwd: New Version 
> Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt)
>
>
>
>
>
> *** WARNING ***
>
> This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an 
> external partner or the internet.
> Consider carefully whether you should click on any links, open any 
> attachments or reply.
> For information regarding Red Flags that you can look out for in 
> emails you receive, click here.
> If you feel the email is suspicious, please follow this process.
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>> This use of 'lineprinter' as a tag for text presentation is a clever 
>> bit of distracting marketing.  It places this category of RFC 
>> representation into a nicely archaic box, serving to reduce the sense 
>> of its current utility.
>
>
>
> It’s also a useful reminder in that getting an ASCII RFC to print 
> properly on a modern page-not-line printer is nontrivial; I can rarely 
> get it to work.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> The only problem is that printing is not its only use and well might 
>> not be its primary use.
>>
>> By way of the simplest possible example, please note that IETF 
>> discussions about draft revisions usually are in a form that is based 
>> on the text version and not on a markup version.  Sometimes xml2rfc 
>> form is used, but not that often.  Essentially never in html or epub or...
>>
>> Consider this the next time you see or create an old/new sequence 
>> during a discussion and let's stop trying to marginalize the text 
>> version with inappropriate tags.
>>
>> d/
>>
>> --
>> Dave Crocker
>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>> bbiw.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>
>
>
> --
> - Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
> https://keybase.io/timbray)
>
> ********************************************************************
> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended 
> recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended 
> recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or 
> distribute its contents to any other person.
> ********************************************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list