Re: draft-rfc-image-files-00.txt

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

 



John C Klensin wrote:
 
> My hope is that we can discuss and figure out whether
> the community likes and will accept the general idea.

What *is* the general idea ?  If it's "attaching" one
or more figures / images to an RFC I'm fine with it.

Technical detail, for some years we could still stay
within the limits of 8+3 like so:

rfc5555.txt, rfc555a.svg, rfc5555b.gif, rfc5555d.png 

The a..z (26 figures) is not a hard limit, aa..az etc.
is in theory possible (but not more 8+3).  

Your proposal rfc5555.img.pdf gets the conflict with
8+3 now.  And it makes it hard to address individual
figures within this proprietary container format.

It's not impossible, the application/pdf RFC explains
how fragments can address parts of a PDF, but I think
it's rarely used.  

As soon as you have "more than one" part you can as 
well go for the real thing, each figure in a part,
skip the ugly container.  Or pick SWF instead of PDF,
I'd like it better.  What about ordinary TGZs if you
insist on a container format ?  

"Anything PDF" is a serious showstopper from my POV.

 Frank

_______________________________________________

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

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