RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



If we want to enforce simpler, more accurate design the best way to do
this would be to require a formal proof of correctness before accepting
a specification.

Requiring people to use 1960s technology is not a way to achieve
simplicity.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Masataka Ohta
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 8:30 AM
> To: Yaakov Stein
> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx; Stewart Bryant
> Subject: Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML)
> 
> Yaakov Stein wrote:
> 
> >>It's good that protocols needing more than 72 ASCII characters are 
> >>forbidden.
> 
> > Just imagine what elegantly simple protocols we would have if we 
> > required the descriptions to be in Morse code.
> 
> Good idea.
> 
> It's a better approach to enforce much simpler protocols.
> 
> 						Masataka Ohta
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> 

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]