Re: RFC archival format, was: Re: More liberal draft formatting standards required

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

 



On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum<iljitsch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> A much better solution would be HTML, if it's sufficiently constrained. HTML
> allows for the reflowing of text, solving issues with text and screen sizes.
> It's also extremely widely implemented, so it's easy to display reasonably
> well without special tools. It also allows for semantic tagging, allowing
> for easy scraping.

This seems obviously true everywhere outside the IETF mailing list.

> Last but not least, just filter out anything between < and > and replace a
> few &xxx; sequences and you're back to plain text. We could probably even
> format RFCs such that if you remove the HTML, you're left with the current
> ASCII format.

Yes and no.  Yes, removing markup leaves useful text, but no, it
wouldn't be anything like the line-broken, paginated,
headered-and-footered, legacy text format.  -Tim
_______________________________________________

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]