> On 25-jun-2006, at 22:41, Stewart Bryant wrote: > >> As an example, this .gif extracted from the Y.1711 OAM protocol >> would be quite difficult in ASCII. > > I'm not surprised, as it contains too much information to be readable > in a 925 pixel wide GIF. I think this supports Stephen's point that > if a diagram can't be expressed as ASCII art it's too complex. > On 25-jun-2006, at 23:05, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > >> However the text in that GIF is unreadable as rendered in my mail >> client (MacOS Mail.app). When viewed with Preview and the Gimp, >> the background turns gray with white boxes behind the (still >> unreadable) text. > Stewart again: > >> It would take a lot of words >> to describe, which many people would then have to transcribe to >> some sort of timing diagram - which then may or may not be >> correct. > > Human communciation is done with words. Sure, sometimes images help, > but the only way a diagram can convey a lot of information with > enough precision is to use a highly structured modelling language, > which we'd then have to assume every reader of the RFC in question > understands. Images really aren't as useful as you think. On 26-jun-2006, at 07:09, Randy Presuhn wrote: > I can't make any sense of the graphics, even with my reading glasses. > Could you give a textual account of whatever it is that the diagram > is trying to communicate? These comments speaks for themselves... I could not get anything out of the picture either. /L-E _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf