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

Phillip Hallam-Baker phill at hallambaker.com
Mon Jun 30 12:51:12 PDT 2014


And like all such hacks it only works *AFTER* you have discovered that the
200+ page document you sent to the printer and cannot cancel is printing
out with one fewer or one more lines per page than intended and thus
producing utterly useless garbage.

Sure I could spend my time working around the obsolete work practices of
other people but I have long believed that anyone who can't hack modern
technology should be handed their clock and tea tray. We need new thinking
in IETF. Clinging to 1960s technology is one of the reasons practically
none of the IETF participants is aged between 25 and 40. The demographics
only look as good as they are because we get lots of grad students
involved. But we don't keep any of them.

It's 2014 folk, if you don't like the term 'lineprinter' for the plaintext
format then you really won't like the alternatives.


In the 1960s printers worked on fanfold paper and most used US paper sizes,
even in Europe. Today lineprinters are obsolete and the default fonts of
modern laser printers are smaller so lineprinter/caveman format comes out
wrong even when using US paper.




On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:47 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.
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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
> <http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Red%20Flags.pdf>.*
> * If you feel the email is suspicious, please follow this process
> <http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>.*
>
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20140630/5b0ff378/attachment.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list