[rfc-i] Units

Eric Burger eburger at standardstrack.com
Thu Jan 29 13:43:09 PST 2015

Feeding the silliness:

72 columns x 66 lines is universal. It fits US A size, ISO A4 size, Columbia Carta size, and Canadian PA4 size. The things we are losing by printing on something newer than an LA36.

> On Jan 29, 2015, at 3:02 PM, Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen at me.com> wrote:
> And RFCs should have page breaks on the A4 page boundary instead of
> the non-SI US Letter "standard" :-)
> <ducks>
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> On 1/28/15 1:32 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> I just came across an Internet-Draft referring to "a 100 acre data
>>> center".
>>> So, do we have a policy for units in RFCs? It seems to me that we
>>> should not use quaint local measurements like acres. We should (as
>>> a style guide issue) use scientific, i.e. metric, units, as in "a
>>> 40 hectare data center",
>> Hello Brian,
>> No, there is no policy regarding units in RFCs.  While I have no
>> particular objection to putting something in the web part of the style
>> guide for now encouraging authors to use SI-based units, I would
>> rather see authors and WGs/RGs fix this when it is semantically
>> meaningful to the implementation of a document well before it gets to
>> the RFC Editor.  Where it is not semantically meaningful, I am fine
>> with a recommend not require.
>> - -Heather
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20150129/7691deb8/attachment.asc>

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list