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

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

 



Just a +1 to the thrust of Paul's suggestion. The I-D does
appear a bit over complex to me,

S.

Paul Hoffman wrote:
> At 2:20 PM -0400 8/23/08, John C Klensin wrote:
>> --On Saturday, 23 August, 2008 14:55 +0200 Frank Ellermann
>> <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>  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.
>> That is it.  No intention to solve all possible problems, just
>> what appears to us to be a large and growing subset in which
>> pretty-printed figures, images, and the like would significantly
>> add to RFC comprehensibility without having to reopen the debate
>> about alternate base formats, searchability, etc., etc.
> 
> While it is easy to agree with the "no intention to solve all 
> possible problems", the proposed solution is much more difficult than 
> is needed, and is also prone to problems in the long term.
> 
>  From the draft, the problem to be solved is:
> 
>     Documents in the RFC series normally use only plain-text ASCII
>     characters and a fixed-width font.  However, there is sometimes a
>     need to supplement the ASCII text with graphics or picture images.
> 
> Given that problem statement, a simple solution would be for RFCs to 
> be able to reference art files archived by the RFC Editor using 
> format-neutral URLs. Initially, those art files could be GIFs, PNGs, 
> or PDFs. Years from now, when there are no commonly-available readers 
> for a particular image type that was used earlier, the RFC Editor of 
> the time can convert the old images to newer ones.
> 
> An example of a format-neutral URL might be 
> <http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcs/rfc5110.art>.
> 
> This proposal takes no changes from the current format for Internet 
> Drafts or RFCs. It does require that the RFC Editor add some tools 
> and maintain URLs in a consistent manner, but that is what they are 
> paid to do. It also avoids the problems that have been listed so far.
> 
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
_______________________________________________

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]