[rfc-i] Following up from Atlanta

Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) jhildebr at cisco.com
Wed Dec 5 09:48:07 PST 2012

On 12/5/12 12:20 AM, ""Martin J. Dürst"" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:

>On 2012/12/05 6:08, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
>> Note, it may be that we could get the publishing process to run lynx (et
>> al.) or some equivalent to render a good-enough plain text version, with
>> the understanding that it would be missing key features.  In that case,
>> "good enough" is important; we might decide that images are replaced by
>> [IMAGE DELETED], non-ASCII7 codepoints like Ⅷ are replaced with [U+2167:
>Why that? It would make both examples and names much more difficult to

That was a design goal.  If you want us to create crappy text-only
versions for you, because you're the one person in the world that refuses
to use a web browser, I think capturing the data is more important than
making the output pretty.

The other option would be to try to approximate the unicode code point
with ASCII, but that's *really* hard.

Joe Hildebrand

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list