[rfc-i] SVG meta-languages

[jhildebr at cisco.com (Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr))]

Sounds great, thanks.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand





On 2/15/16, 7:18 PM, "Nevil Brownlee" <n.brownlee at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:

>
>Hi Joe:
>
>This far along, I think you're right, my metalanguage is really
>just another way of producing the SVG images.
>
>After thinking about it for a while, I propose to rework section 5
>to present its images as examples of drawings typically used in RFCs,
>and to say clearly that producing diagrams using Inkscape, Dia,
>LibreOffice, dot, etc, and then pushing them through our tool to
>strip anything not compatible with SVG-1.2-RFC, is the best approach.
>
>I'm away for about a week starting tomorrow, it will be towards the
>end of next week before I'll have time to make these changes.
>
>Does all that sound OK to you?
>
>Cheers, Nevil
>
>
>On 16/02/16 7:36 am, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
>> On further reading of draft-iab-svg-rfc, I think it may be time to either remove section 5 in its entirety, or to replace it with a single paragraph like:
>>
>> """
>> Several tools exist to generate SVG from a higher-level input format.  For example, packet layout diagrams and sequence diagrams are image types both can be readily converted from a domain-specific language to SVG.
>> """
>>
>> This would remove a bunch of non-normative text from the document, making it a lot easier to read.
>>
>> Note: I believe this text was important to get us to this point, and represents good work.  Nevil, if you want to make sure the work doesn't get lost, I would recommend writing a single draft for each of the input formats.
>>
>
>
>-- 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Nevil Brownlee                          Computer Science Department
>  Phone: [phone] x88941             The University of Auckland
>  FAX: [phone]   Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand