IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [art] New RFCs text formatting

"Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com> Sun, 01 December 2019 17:56 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.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 C70BB120072 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 2019 09:56:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 03B2tahQR5OJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 2019 09:56:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sobco.sobco.com (unknown [136.248.127.164]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E48212004E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Dec 2019 09:56:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D605D2577B2C; Sun, 1 Dec 2019 12:56:02 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sobco.com
Received: from sobco.sobco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sobco.sobco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ihPA2KP7hqod; Sun, 1 Dec 2019 12:55:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from golem.sobco.com (golem.sobco.com [136.248.127.162]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BE402577B13; Sun, 1 Dec 2019 12:55:59 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Subject: Re: [art] New RFCs text formatting
From: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com>
In-Reply-To: <6EA0235C-BC0F-466D-8222-9F1C557421E1@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2019 12:55:59 -0500
Cc: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DE061B13-E6BB-43E5-B814-F44868A23CFF@sobco.com>
References: <86428447-b3d5-92b0-b404-2b94a5915385@foobar.org> <6EA0235C-BC0F-466D-8222-9F1C557421E1@network-heretics.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/A8IYzZOgL80uudS3Vw21epMFxGw>
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: Sun, 01 Dec 2019 17:56:05 -0000

+1

> On Dec 1, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 1, 2019, at 12:28 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I'd be happy for pagination to be the default if there were rough consensus that the primary medium for reading RFCs was printed paper.
> 
> Seems like this is backwards.  Pagination should be removed from plain text RFCs only if there’s rough consensus that nobody prints RFCs anymore - not because a few individuals think that nobody should do that, or think that they’re in a position to dictate how RFCs are used. 
> 
> Keith
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email