[rfc-i] Character sets, was Comments on draft-iab-rfcformat

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 00:09:02 PST 2012

On 19/12/2012 04:59, John R Levine wrote:
>> I am a developer, and when I have to carefully read each word and
>> analyze the meaning of each sentence, there is no better support for
>> me than a printed page in ASCII.
> I also write my share of code that implmenents various standards, and I
> prefer a printed page that looks typeset, not like a 1960s line printer,
> or maybe something on my tablet, or legible on my screen. 

Isn't the point that the normative text MUST be unambiguous and
universally displayable/printable? I don't think that imposes ASCII,
but it is still a very strong constraint. In a sense, ASCII is the
lazy way to implement that constraint. Saying "any Unicode and any
font is allowed" clearly does not meet the constraint. We have to be
somewhere in between.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list