Return-Path: <0100016949647f53-8a4d372a-c576-4489-a1e5-b885c6510a1f-000000@amazonses.watsen.net> X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5EF1310E9 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2019 07:48:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.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 q96qQhfpO7mR for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2019 07:48:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from a8-33.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-33.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1D791310D5 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2019 07:48:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ug7nbtf4gccmlpwj322ax3p6ow6yfsug; d=amazonses.com; t=1551714517; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:Feedback-ID; bh=DR0Jqn016nfyN5O8M/VIStQJMpW6VDM3bxl87E5XDs8=; b=UVG9wkFjL8GM0ddHVBhX1HDLnAYkXMPE6i7Q6vFI7Nf/yEmk7yW2mPcUQ+91rzoD J9lRAWUQAMe3qgcO5B4D8p+LGljSajCDFNfVhlduy787+lvwBZcqz70kD5zHC8+Sf14 6gfeB763TYO36pB+M/7LTgsb3CY+GyV96yrdDFMs= From: Kent Watsen Message-ID: <0100016949647f53-8a4d372a-c576-4489-a1e5-b885c6510a1f-000000@email.amazonses.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_96A21EA2-FFD8-40B6-97D5-2DB3B5A31D23" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\)) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2019 15:48:36 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20190304.132926.1893685857666021666.mbj@tail-f.com> Cc: rwilton@cisco.com, netmod@ietf.org To: Martin Bjorklund References: <8ddf74d483674c598e52ece716f70d0a@XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com> <20190304.124912.231750494593528236.mbj@tail-f.com> <85b4bfc8-1d55-8df2-98b2-85e685996309@cisco.com> <20190304.132926.1893685857666021666.mbj@tail-f.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3) X-SES-Outgoing: 2019.03.04-54.240.8.33 Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES Archived-At: Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes? X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org 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: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 15:48:41 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_96A21EA2-FFD8-40B6-97D5-2DB3B5A31D23 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > But note that figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces > (they _can_ be outdented, if the lines are long enough). The days of scraping from plain-text RFCs are over [1]. Extracting, if = needed at all, should be from the XML, where there are no such issues. = Extracting from the plain-text output makes about as much sense as = extracting from the HTML or PDF outputs. Lossless extractions are critical for formal verifications (e.g., doctor = reviews, shepherd reviews, AUTH48 reviews). Both the double-backslash = approach we currently have, and the single-backslash approach we had = originally (where the continuation-line begins on column 1, as it has = been in programming languages for decades) provide lossless extractions. The double-backslash approach is ideal for when pretty-indents are = desired. The single-backslash approach is ideal for when the = pretty-indents are not needed. Both are completely valid and useful. = My contention is that we unnecessarily threw out one when reaching for = the other. =20 [1] https://pypi.org/project/xiax Kent= --Apple-Mail=_96A21EA2-FFD8-40B6-97D5-2DB3B5A31D23 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

But note that = figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces
(they _can_ be outdented, if the = lines are long enough).

The days of scraping = from plain-text RFCs are over [1].  Extracting, if needed at all, = should be from the XML, where there are no such issues. Extracting from = the plain-text output makes about as much sense as extracting from the = HTML or PDF outputs.

Lossless extractions are critical for formal verifications = (e.g., doctor reviews, shepherd reviews, AUTH48 reviews).   Both = the double-backslash approach we currently have, and the = single-backslash approach we had originally (where the continuation-line = begins on column 1, as it has been in programming languages for decades) = provide lossless extractions.

The double-backslash approach is ideal = for when pretty-indents are desired.   The single-backslash = approach is ideal for when the pretty-indents are not needed.  Both = are completely valid and useful.   My contention is that we = unnecessarily threw out one when reaching for the other. =  

[1] https://pypi.org/project/xiax

Kent
= --Apple-Mail=_96A21EA2-FFD8-40B6-97D5-2DB3B5A31D23--