--On Thursday, 05 January, 2006 13:17 -0500 "Gray, Eric"
<Eric.Gray@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Stewart,
>
> You bring up a good point. I have been assuming that -
> since IDs can be submitted in multiple formats - that the
> additional formats would also become part of the RFC library
> on publication.
> I just took a quick peek at the RFCs and there does not
> appear to be a single example of a version that is not in
> text format. I don't know if that is because they are not
> stored in the same place, or they are not carried forward as
> part of the publishing process.
>...
The number is not huge, but some RFCs have, in fact, been
published formally in PS and/or PDF as well as in ASCII (and I'm
on the hook for another one... something else in a too-long
queue). See RFC 3550 and 3551 for recent standards-track
examples and RFC 1119 for an a Full Standard example that is
legendary in some parts of the community for incomprehensibility
if one has only the ASCII text and diagrams.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf