Re: Towards consensus on document format

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

 



Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830 dot hpcl dot titech dot ac dot jp> wrote:

FYI, your claim was:

: Here is an example of PDF-A that uses nothing but ASCII characters:

a PDF file whose *contents* were claimed to be pure ASCII

See above.

and now it is claimed that this demonstrates not only that the contents of a PDF file cannot be plain ASCII, but also that HTML is too unstable for a reduced-feature profile to be successful?

Are you saying your PDF-A file is good but your definition of PDF-A is bad?

But, broken definition is worse than broken tools, which, even more strongly, means we must not use profiled subset.

I really don't understand what you are trying to prove here, except perhaps that I am a fool, and I don't understand in what way that benefits the IETF.

Is it your claim that no PDF/A file could possibly exist without at least one non-ASCII character in its contents?

Is it your claim that the "document properties" metadata, which of course doesn't exist for a plain-text RFC, is essential to the nature of a PDF/A RFC, and that no tool could exist that would not insert a trademark symbol or other non-ASCII character into this metadata?

Or are you just trying to show that you are more clever than me?

--
Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |  http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s ­

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
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]