On 11/30/19 6:46 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
It seems that it ought to take a consensus call (here, rfc-interest, somewhere else?) to change the default output prouced by the IETF tools. The question of pagination of output was more contentious than I would have expected in previous rounds.
It appears that having the canonical format of RFCs be a format other than one that people actually use, has "interesting" consequences. For example, anyone can generate RFCs in their own preferred format, using whatever typeface, pagination, TOC format, references format, etc. they wish, and it's difficult to tell (either by looking or comparison with the copy from the RFC Editor's site) whether such an RFC is genuine.
I think it would also be "interesting" if the preferred source for RFCs became a site other than rfc-editor.org. (Which, for all I know, might already be the case.)
Keith
