IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 26 October 2020 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A3D3A0E1D; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:56:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.345
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.345 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R71G0iT0XThI; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62b.google.com (mail-pl1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CC413A0BFD; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id r3so5122585plo.1; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tLo/y5Vedw44N+0f4QXuPSUXPpVGrEH5Rgaf0QBkA8A=; b=bw47XzsxPCWi/b1HFbI+yWnV0GZhpSxlDAJgRFQbd2ZGIjf/eOCphYLUoUM/y3KLjs R6AuYyd99f27mrJys42rOPICA2xB2i4D30Lghvv4tt6TPnaapX+tRfQsYoG9+MaEIY/0 lJqxBQWrIJS4A/iGG5h+DGW3hKayJShHlvwrswov8VqCTv3XMperBcEifHkK27lvdKI0 AveOBhJchLLLFvbBiW8HS5ZUNgXq0kT+/xU9f00HdvnyoE/vRJ9w7ww2y+hjZ4SN7/V3 jwq7eXpOV1IvvOH4KZ3KkgNY7MgTCC4UkvMS51vO3gsm2xocBl1H+kBJ4ZHPYn8wnPVY 1dzQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tLo/y5Vedw44N+0f4QXuPSUXPpVGrEH5Rgaf0QBkA8A=; b=uiIgBpX/eBWw+L+BrPJ2oBz4qqHXjVhZpAcPZhVHLGzQC2su7zPgNdmezs2ulaNvgt TGoFoKoOArz1uKUkWbkZQndFZwZ8FOBoVKfRGaIBuRSn7WPtY2IHDWAk/r+NZZd+aHWc ZM3IMvJzZA297wQjn+seybZ3opl+o6qFuD/XCYk70c+Lu1DSEpgAfyD7/vHgWxl2H1xG QViTWmJT4Sr5y0lhjfm9p+5LXK92MLzJAYK2BNh9avG2XARXFrA2zprqHzU8KtNGeThR 8BVARNvOLmPjzpvGP+EoKffxrjJ9BThU0KUdxMMjAjN1GTQf02Bb+itcqny9bseABdbx jwSQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531NLqhLVnd4Ik2FZV3eOFCIVcXysS/zuDrY4KE7RABEvavb+IlL SBhhOFYciVVLpiPB/x3RRRY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxg+UQuRX4VnUcfiKdWSw6yVNjdapXUepg53Ir9esGSPxh6VeSl+ZIcNCiiZ3NkMwfRtf4wkg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:a782:: with SMTP id f2mr18007664pjq.50.1603738603840; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:56:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.2.2.3] ([103.23.18.158]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d8sm13994080pjc.40.2020.10.26.11.56.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, ietf@ietf.org
Cc: wgchairs@ietf.org, ietf@johnlevine.com, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, rsoc@iab.org
References: <20201026020433.GA19475@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CADaq8je8gMwAkOndTNJ9ndwzOZb2HQMZrCUJ5wNUjw-6ax9QtA@mail.gmail.com> <35EFE952-7786-4E24-B228-9BEE51D3C876@tzi.org> <20201026150241.GK48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20201026162814.GP39170@kduck.mit.edu> <20201026164036.GO48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <1a56dc3b-56ef-3ffb-a12b-44d5e0d0f835@levkowetz.com> <20201026171931.GP48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <b733240-fc78-5a71-8920-ff84fbf64287@iecc.com> <20201026180105.GQ48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <03976f9f-7f49-7bf7-ce29-ee989232a44d@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 07:56:36 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201026180105.GQ48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/4OTbPcBwiJsJANGYncjO934nI0w>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:56:46 -0000

As Julian Reschke observed on the rfc-interest list, since the
new RFC format was implemented:

>  page numbers should not be used to refer to parts of the
>  RFC, because page breaks vary with output formats

So I can only see confusion if people use page numbers for
any purpose whatever. So it doesn't matter if people want
page numbers; they're now useless. So I won't be answering
a poll, and I don't think the results are interesting.

Regards
   Brian 

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 27-Oct-20 07:01, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Since about RFC8650, newer RFC will not have any renderings with
> page numbers on {datatracker,tools}.ietf.org. See explanation from
> John Levine below.
> 
> Not having followed the details of the RFC/XMLv3 standardization process,
> i was surprised by this because i think there is no reason to
> have additional renderings, maybe even only on tools.ietf.org that
> do include page numbers (and technically it does not seem to be a problem
> either). 
> 
> If you care to express your position,
> i have created a poll for this, please chime in there:
> 
> https://www.poll-maker.com/results3188562x294441dA-98
> 
> Cheers
>     toerless
> 
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 01:35:43PM -0400, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> Could you please explain why RSOC does not want to permit the ability
>>> to have paginated RFC output options ? Also, where and when was this
>>> discussed with the community ?
>>
>> It was discussed in the multi-year process leading to the IAB
>> publishing RFCs 7990, 7991, 7992, 7993, 7994, 7995, 7996, 7997, and
>> 7998 in 2016. I'm sure you know how to find the discussions in the
>> archives.  Henrik knows all of this and I cannot imagine why he did not tell
>> you the same thing.
>>
>> I am aware there is one recent RFC author who did not participate in
>> the process at all and has been complaining that the text version of
>> his RFC doesn't have page numbers. I've explained this to him more
>> than once, and see no reason to waste more time on it.
>>
>> R's,
>> John
> 
> .
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email