https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment-07
and
https://sandbox-htmlize.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment-07
1. IMO the new version is more difficult to read at the usual window
size that I use. (it looks better if I narrow the window). The larger
typeface means that fewer lines can be displayed on a typical screen,
leading to what I used to call "blackberry disease" - people don't seem
to be as patient when reading documents if they have to scroll more to
read them. (These days "blackberry disease" is nearly universal as
nearly everyone reads mail on a handheld mobile device, which has made
email much less useful for technical discussion than it once was.)
(Though I will admit that some people prefer larger type. I'd
personally prefer to try to fit about an entire page in the window
height, but only until the type size is reduced to around 11pt. Maybe
there could be a preference item for something like this?)
(I haven't tried to read this on a mobile device)
2. The sidebar in the new version is a nice touch. Kudos for
responsive design that puts a menu button in the upper right corner when
the window is narrowed.
3. I'm not fond of the typeface chosen in my browser (which looks to be
Liberation Mono on Brave under Ubuntu). It looks better at small sizes
than at the size used for my typical browser window. I recognize that
it's hard to make any web page look good on the wide variety of browsers
in use, particularly if the web page doesn't supply its own font(s).
4. Visually, it's nice to have different typefaces used for the document
text and the controls.
5. I'm a little surprised that the "Other formats" menu doesn't allow
selection of a non-paginated HTML version, which might be preferable on
handheld devices.
Overall, I'm favorably impressed. I also suspect that the new version
will be more adaptable to future needs than the old one.
Keith
