[rfc-i] not just 'lineprinter' (was Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-flanagan-plaintext-00.txt)

Dave Crocker dhc at dcrocker.net
Fri Jun 27 06:12:51 PDT 2014

On 6/27/2014 4:47 AM, George, Wes wrote:
> That said, I do not believe that your legitimate request for a
> printer-friendly format translates to a need to keep the existing
> nongraphical *line printer*-friendly format, and if that's not what you're
> advocating for,

This use of 'lineprinter' as a tag for text presentation is a clever bit
of distracting marketing.  It places this category of RFC representation
into a nicely archaic box, serving to reduce the sense of its current

The only problem is that printing is not its only use and well might not
be its primary use.

By way of the simplest possible example, please note that IETF
discussions about draft revisions usually are in a form that is based on
the text version and not on a markup version.  Sometimes xml2rfc form is
used, but not that often.  Essentially never in html or epub or...

Consider this the next time you see or create an old/new sequence during
a discussion and let's stop trying to marginalize the text version with
inappropriate tags.


Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list