[rfc-i] draft-iab-xml2rfc-02 - alignment of sourcecode

Martin J. Dürst duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Thu Feb 4 20:47:54 PST 2016



On 2016/02/05 13:42, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 2/4/16 8:53 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>> On 2016/02/05 06:04, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>> Thanks for the example! (PaulK, I assume that your ideas might match
>>> Tony's.) However, I disagree with the utility. See below.
>>
>> (actual code removed)
>>
>>>> In my mind, that indentation of the second block looks rather weird.
>>>
>>> And our minds definitely differ. If someone is reading the RFC and see
>>> the proper indentation, they would assume that the second block is at
>>> the same level as the first block. For my eyes, your example is exactly
>>> why we *don't* want to let authors move their <sourcecode> horizontally
>>> in the output.
>>
>> For the record, I'd tend to be with Paul on this one.
>
> You need to be more specific about your Pauls, since this discussion is
> Paul vs. Paul. From context I guess you mean you are with Paul H.

Yes, sorry, correct.

Regards,   Martin.

>      Thanks,
>      Paul K.
>
>> It may be
>> different if it's in a different section, and presented independently.
>> On the other hand, it might be better to tighten up the expository style
>> (separate text and source more), or to extract code blocks into
>> functions so that each piece can stand on its own.
>>
>> BTW, do we have the possibility to add line numbers to source code
>> blocks? That can often be very handy.
>>
>> Regards,   Martin.
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> .
>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list