Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?

"Adrian Farrel" <> Tue, 26 February 2019 22:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A61C130EA0 for <>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:26:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8eNhTHc5q87V for <>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:26:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F8C0130E9A for <>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:26:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x1QMQlmi015815; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:26:47 GMT
Received: from (unknown []) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 321CB2203B; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:26:47 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CFD12203A; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:26:47 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x1QMQjoY005559 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:26:46 GMT
From: Adrian Farrel <>
To: 'Kent Watsen' <>,
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:26:45 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <04b001d4ce22$5bd78d50$1386a7f0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04B1_01D4CE22.5BD913F0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQIdXCwF6+3Dw/Axku1x55iGoJDnF6VhisFw
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-
X-TM-AS-Result: No--19.531-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--19.531-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Result: 10--19.531400-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: Jm7Yxmmj9OnxIbpQ8BhdbFPjo7D4SFg4H181YDtIVarE3grQNcpLWBYR 8SHMAtRe+jMk79vvL8wOwWXaw100i+L5N47U/H9LNNX8HVS75cIrHkgIan9a0f0TP/kikeqnLF9 jbxvK1+1BP2/NT7tdhKPCbIW4ooFkDtZgR42ZNmezI1v7J4hECjFFLhGUD8AWzPV+pffXxU/O/T 5SZgJlwxhq3QN0UjY7YrJsCrWcb8Gt4BGEUg27DVZ14JN9Kx7yf6/Md8Lb2l84kO+ca7VnMYSz4 x6Okmj/NtrqBJtuOX5YFBU0+2PUKWE2dpl/p8cM9TVembY3XZL8BlbXy+O/WjqI/Q1zONHSW+v0 m5ycBq/OQf/S1XvtEBm20HYf5Ey/CRueYusp1xz4pTO56aJ0/MMdI0UcXEHz+5+93dPb6/c3W+9 uVNwsfDXkIGZzDHWYklPOPDP4bOiuEAHkLyBnqm/+RwWenb0YwSJcbRHuoMdT+oAjVn9e0Dyrc+ h5xgzUu7C4hieFwVKAMuqetGVettUTseZWdUYe/sToY2qzpx4DOZGFGsyhFbDszp3K5gqDLVdRl lUTWIUyyNL6ySBa6XVhdBSwY3CvlKi2fr7WheHNooEVx3+DjQ==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:26:53 -0000



I've been having this discussion with Kent off-line, but thought it should
come to the list.


I don't think it is a good idea to have two approaches. While it would be
relatively easy to code for both approaches, it seems to add a degree of
confusion if both have to be handled by the same code (consider deciding
whether leading space characters are to be retained or not, something that
can only be decided when the first non-space character is found), or by
having different code for the two different cases.


It doesn't seem to me that both cases are needed. We can pick one or the


And *if* we want to allow manual folding so that indents can be made to make
the document more human-readable then we have to use a leading '\' on
continuation lines to show which spaces should be stripped and which





From: netmod <> On Behalf Of Kent Watsen
Sent: 25 February 2019 22:22
Subject: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?



I had a chat with the tools team recently and, in the course of things, it
was implied

that the double backslash approach we have now was both surprising and


This got me thinking that we may have thrown the proverbial baby out with
the bathwater.

That is, currently we have a header that reads:


  NOTE: '\\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX)


So why not *also* support a header that reads (note the singe slash):


  NOTE: '\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX)


Whereby this second form only supports the folded line continuing on column
1 (no indents).




Kent // contributor