[rfc-i] Preparing for allowing v3 submissions into the repository (was Re: [xml2rfc-dev] Alternate artwork vocabulary and post preptool)

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Fri Feb 8 00:42:58 PST 2019


On 08.02.2019 07:50, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> On 2019-02-08 00:03, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> What is the status of inline SVG?
>>
>> For the purposes of authoring, a separate file is great. The preptool
>> might inline the file to ensure that there is just one file to
>> manage.
>>
>> A data: URI is the worst possible option from a usability
>> perspective. It's also less efficient.
> 
> Agreed.  Which is what the described change is aimed at avoiding.  It would
> in all cases let the preptool inline the SVG, instead of having to stash it
> in a data: URI when there is also ascii-art fallback content.
> 
> The original discussion on xml2rfc-dev has more details.
> 
> Best,
> 
> 	Henrik

Ah, that makes a lot of sense.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list