[rfc-i] Pagination requirements

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Wed May 23 14:22:52 PDT 2012

On 5/23/2012 1:51 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 23 May 2012, at 22:25 , Joe Touch wrote:
> Well, obviously printing is still a requirement, even though IMO the
> display on screens takes precedence. Your assumption is that if the
> format is HTML it must be possible to print from a browser. However,
> this could also happen through a separate tool, or by having alternative
> print-ready versions published by the RFC Editor.

So 2 solutions to printing, assuming we go with HTML:

1) use another tool
	when I proposed that ^L was still useful, I suggested
	a widely available included tool on an existing OS,
	and was mocked for needing to resize the font

2) use another layout

	we just as easily generate "display on a ridiculous device"
	formats for those who insist on wanting to read RFCs on
	4" smartphone displays too ;-)

I.e., this argues for "different formats for different purposes", but I 
thought that broke a bunch of requirements.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list