[rfc-i] What the text version is used for (was Re: The <tt> train wreck)

Robert Sparks rjsparks at nostrum.com
Sat Aug 21 10:55:12 PDT 2021


Tearing out the separate topic (as Carsten already identified).


On 8/16/21 2:10 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Am 16.08.2021 um 08:56 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
>> On 2021-08-16, at 08:30, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> what purpose does the TXT version
>>> serve?
>>
>> That is indeed an interesting question, and one answer is in 
>> <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/BK7yyQoSbhnbYDYsyzjk_J2vufg>
>>
>> The question is, however, not so relevant to the discussion at hand.
>> After a decade of trying to suppress the TXT version, it is still 
>> considered desirable by many even after the transition that was meant 
>> to make it less relevant.  So I would expect that, independent of any 
>> outcome of the discussion of the question for the reasons, the TXT 
>> version is here to stay.
>>
>> So, back to fixing the train wreck.
>
> I agree that it'll stay; the question is what are the use cases, and how
> does this discussion relate to these.
>
> Decoration in plain txt was removed because it was distracting (it was),
> and thus people avoided font changes altogether. If there was a
> consensus what the TXT version is needed for, this would help us in
> deciding things like these.

There have been several times we have had long threads where people have 
told us what they use the text formats for. They've been compelling, at 
least to me, for helping ensure the format continues to be produced.

I truly don't know what you're looking for when you say "consensus what 
the TXT version is needed for". Are you looking for a document that's 
gone through some formal consensus-gauging process that iterates these 
things? Are you just looking for an easy-to-find list of things that 
people have told us? Can you point more clearly at what you think we 
should have that would help?

I note that your choice of words "what the TXT version is needed for" 
frames things differently than "what the TXT version is used for". The 
difference will make the conversation less one of defending the format 
and more of exposing what's people actually need from it.

RjS

>
> Best regards, Julian
> _______________________________________________
> 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