[rfc-i] Two drafts showing the advantage of the new format

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Wed Aug 16 18:13:50 PDT 2017


Note that at least one IAB member at the time thought the plan was to modify the rfcs in question in light of experience.  I believe said IAB member made this point at a plenary.  

-- 
Andrew Sullivan 
Please excuse my clumbsy thums. 

> On Aug 16, 2017, at 20:30, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 16 Aug 2017, at 17:22, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Adam Roach <adam at nostrum.com> wrote:
>>> The diagrams in the new format will not allow colors. You're going to want
>>> to use some other mechanism to indicate what you are currently intending
>>> color to mean.
>>> 
>> Perhaps we should let IETF participants see and decide for themselves?
> 
> The IETF did that during the various discussions on draft-iab-svg-rfc, which became RFC 7996.
> 
>> Until you have a working toolset, all you have is suggestions.
> 
> You have an RFC to work from. If you want to re-open the discussion based on your experience, you can certainly do so. There is an issue list at:
>   https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-svg-rfc-bis
> 
> --Paul Hoffman
> _______________________________________________
> 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