IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] RFC 7996 fill and stroke "none" and other issues

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 25 October 2021 06:36 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B39F3A0827; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:36:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.53
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-3.33, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmx.net
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 B_nrAsQz5vV8; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32D503A005F; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A0920F56F; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:35:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7DE720F56F for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:35:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mU8GPbqpn_tW for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8EFB200CD8 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1635143736; bh=bRe3zZsmN8aLN9uEANitikepgkLE7DTmoTiz7s8RIHw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Cy++VQbOcyO9lM0d9GpG4TwAqJ7gwIMZHVx5TPwNdb2bjk///FXR8y62frByQu/VC EtiSN7/ExlU+mkYRqMB2PNHy0Pl0QYDM+DaQHNTS5qo4LzR7JH/gTGtS80ihtZg1OR 01kdkvr6xvRRrBMGbYopeZL6VQuGOJxoG0m4V7Sw=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([217.251.129.254]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mjj87-1n7P1v2cwN-00lDcU; Mon, 25 Oct 2021 08:35:36 +0200
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <20211024220034.868B32D32D9C@ary.qy>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <c6cd4960-e688-d517-00ab-9eec92d1b071@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 08:35:35 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20211024220034.868B32D32D9C@ary.qy>
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:LC/FZ5S4chJOUYKo+p5opxyYcE2gTwuuK1jLPUHcvFuVlmildb/ yCJKjLjCtbGxTo09i5DDf/+ywSz8IctgqnW6HvLBLDkgsjKPDbGeAdXUcZgrJnbHY/QtOVo sksIGW7XhjnvLs6EsY5Q6m5j2UEXAHwqg3kPJnnivI0wlZ5tAHMa9GZufoD6isEn4gU/MX+ 8MXdkvg9yAyoymDPuhNuw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:Vk2CY9v+Z+4=:Zvn12u5lQMULwpCvpc8J4r HD+f3NBuNqZqbZ95z0wkyNvf0rVOYJ1xn2jtM66EGC9a0hf2LwL6gw1YjLzyiGI3bxc0X2ymC xOJTkia5FcjlCd9Z5/fS0bUBaCW6J1MPnD9Y8bAp1YmOjMF9s/Wsl14sORw/uSJnaL32runmY 3CgxCE3Cn0O6TycEcEWbxdpKDJ/zy8qPP83Ybkqhv1f+t9r/YhcKWec+S/Q6SLymWUqVErOyG DOeMPTi+MgHY5oTRqEw27IGdpL4BdBBRsNYH8gg7QHE7ax6NgRUraIMrfNklALSuTtywDZh1J 8cSl0cgHtEQeKutfn8Nf1/UM07jZ7kB9fs/tOwVUSVdnucGmTV/CcYLIA+1tMK3a/dPbQGrK/ PxAIwnBajB1lTZgv7IfU35lyDdeWGQW0M2EiGDLhJMiv7Jbts0rQbJUJrc0cekCZTTSPqG3ax C/Amm5DYS+JgVbTg0OOt+rVls51ZXQZpde9O4BxDon+DMYKJox41r7WKiAfLK2pyaApSJhQWo qu7Joqh5ptw7H8W3+gbTrBJPclPaM5fJJmRQaKcxkiAD/xvbP8WxWnvakr6zHntx5Mn3UUQil /85CWfECC3th0OEXVl9AFyW8O8N0FKfIgPEBeuwJ35/0g/32NbYpnplLTtsLayYpNWPrcZhR4 mH1E7NmKjudzxZkb2oaXjYsT9P+OJtwQyIZ06+gx1eTegIOeQBkkCODAsahTcd62AY/dMfPJv 3njg6gWULCWFkoIb30uZAXJ/kk8PqJNdbFIwrlm6dJfsnmGdfWJ9GfBzy/B/ZRTkvya3FZ74t OX0n6tNRrZW59OjIC/7PBpKSkwTy6ojDN4djFkfWP5SBtOzF/uEAzl6s1lkxED0jH35jm44tV SkLUff43ZPG7JIzg1ZoUCmcbtwJ3vBMwZONEIOOqoQHrSBDcwx1+8cECSO9TcMyN3ip9F3BEo v34kDH8GWC9OlC43RfmAP2mF5iNKa71Nc2qZEHLll2reK4DOXW0bfRtbVF5G06y+M4R9xjEWw zlrJEbKRuUEG5NPQFTj2KMPmfP5aGLzaLsBgVkktokj9XbS1ovBFUhnh/fZmltlv2u/LttYYs Rw5CALHv4tHXtk=
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] RFC 7996 fill and stroke "none" and other issues
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Am 25.10.2021 um 00:00 schrieb John Levine:
> It appears that Julian Reschke  <julian.reschke@gmx.de> said:
>> I agree in general.
>>
>> <artset> IMHO was not needed, but that's what under the bridge.
>
> What would you do instead?  Rendering SVG into ASCII art doesn't work very well.

V2 already had an ASCII fallback, we could have used that.

<artset> has introduced a lot of complexity for formatters, and some of
the issues caused by that are still open (see
<https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/136>).

> I'm thinking there are cases where a three-way artset would make sense when the
> artwork is equations, the SVG for HTML snd PDF, an ASCII art version for the TXT,
> and latex or similar source for an acessible version.

Interesting; I always had doubts about <artset> that is used for more
than an ASCII fallback.

It would be indeed interesting to find out about accessibility
recommendations for math. Requiring authors to maintain 3 different
versions consistenly sounds like asking for trouble, though.

Best regards, Julian

PS: let's fix SVG inclusion first.
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email