Re: [rfc-i] What do do about SVG

Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
    > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 15:53, Adam Roach wrote:
    >> Perhaps rather than using syntax to enforce policy, we could shift to
    >> using editorial control to enforce policy. That is, we specify that
    >> non-ASCII diagrams in RFCs are in full-fledged SVG, which has really,
    >> *really* good support in a lot of tools. And then put have in place
    >> instructions to the authors and to the RPC that describe the policy
    >> restrictions (such as those I list above), along with a tool -- in the
    >> style of id-nits -- that helps identify (in an advisory way) when
    >> those policies might not have been followed.

    > I think that is entirely sensible.

I also agree.
This doesn't excuse us from getting authoring tools fixed.
Perhaps some tools will be willing to have a save-as profile.
I still need to know what I did wrong in my content.
Why just us? maybe others in the printing industry will care too.

We are gonna need a way better idnits tool, but I believe that the LLC tools
cmte knows this already.  I hope they are planning to redo idnits soon.

    > I will note that your requirements permit the inclusion of raster
    > images as data: URIs.  Those might be hard to detect without tools.
    > We'll likely need a little back and forth on what the true requirements
    > are.

you mean like the data: URI ?
I'm sure that was unintentional, but yeah, we'll need a tool.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

Re: [rfc-i] What do do about SVG

Attachment: signature.asc