[rfc-i] Pagination requirements

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Wed May 23 12:37:45 PDT 2012

On 5/23/2012 12:33 PM, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On 5/23/12 1:09 PM, "Joe Touch"<touch at isi.edu>  wrote:
>> The claim was that we needed a vintage line printer. We proved that
>> isn't the case. Whether this is a goal of the format or not, it's not a
>> limitation.
> The claim was intended to be that you needed a vintage line printer for it
> to not require gyrations.  I apologize if I didn't make that clear enough.
> Importing into a different application and making a ton of formatting tweaks
> definitely count as gyrations to me.

Yes, opening it in a FREE app included with a very popular commercial 
OS, and changing the fontsize is a ridiculous requirement.

>> Now you want to print from a browser. Browsers are for browsing, not
>> printing - try going to an arbitrary web page and printing it and see
>> what you get.
> A nicely formatted page that includes all of the information I saw on the
> screen, particularly if the author was careful about how they constructed
> the page.

There is no webpage that renders on the variety of browser windows 
currently available that is anything but trivial (maybe SMS messages?).

>> There might be a solution in here somewhere, but it involves changing
>> browsers to know more about how to render printouts. I'm not sure that's
>> a useful requirement.
> Or not being so hung up on the absolute positioning of things on the page
> (including getting rid of page numbers as anchors) that we don't need
> anything more than what browsers currently do.  A slight shift in
> requirements from "the requirement is this particular solution that we
> currently have" to "the requirement is this use pattern" is all that it
> takes.

Removing page numbers is only one part of the problem; there are "tons" 
of other problems that make printing web pages nonsensical.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list