[rfc-i] Pagination requirements

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Thu May 24 07:54:22 PDT 2012

On May 23, 2012, at 8:55 PM, Joe Hildebrand <jhildebr at cisco.com> wrote:

> On 5/23/12 9:10 PM, "Joe Touch" <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
>>> It looks pretty putrid on my Kindle, tiny type and page headers and
>>> footers at arbitrary ugly places.  As I've noted before
>>> xmlrfc->html->mobi looks great.
>> Comparable to the quality of printouts of HTML. 
> You haven't answered my question about what *functional* features you're
> missing from printed HTML.  I understand that the current state-of-the art
> doesn't have adequate controls over widows and orphans, but that's an
> aesthetic issue that doesn't impair your undersatnding of the doc.

Nor does the way the current HTML of non xml2rfc docs displays on phones, but that appears to be driving the desire for change.

> Based on some tests I performed today, support for page-break-before and
> page-break-after is a little hit-and-miss, but page-break-inside works well,
> and that's the one I care about most so that examples don't break pages when
> possible.
> The folks that don't like the lineprinter format have specific functional
> requirements that the status quo does not offer.

Sure - but you're moving the problem and inconvenience to those who want printouts. 

I don't agree with optimizing for phones and tiny readers vs paper and full size readers and laptop screens.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list