IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] Scaling SVG graphics

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Wed, 25 May 2022 06:38 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 ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495EFC14F718 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2022 23:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1653460729; bh=i53yefEd0sHk3NDjcUfMF6poFnCYv1UtCayv/JywQh0=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=yW0hwZof+UhwIiH6U0EvaLli3n9rYgNnT7VNC6o9i0NXO9A4abTij8EIJy38IZRgK RgrAGgQ3OOloXKcJtB1K2UnYImlwQa5Enr45uO9iZEsoIgxWMlkh6j5PKqjGJ0NyH2 tI3JzzLSN4X11x5QCrJ9hUhM7o2l1aj0yH/hU7/A=
X-Mailbox-Line: From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue May 24 23:38:49 2022
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12934C14F688; Tue, 24 May 2022 23:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1653460729; bh=i53yefEd0sHk3NDjcUfMF6poFnCYv1UtCayv/JywQh0=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=yW0hwZof+UhwIiH6U0EvaLli3n9rYgNnT7VNC6o9i0NXO9A4abTij8EIJy38IZRgK RgrAGgQ3OOloXKcJtB1K2UnYImlwQa5Enr45uO9iZEsoIgxWMlkh6j5PKqjGJ0NyH2 tI3JzzLSN4X11x5QCrJ9hUhM7o2l1aj0yH/hU7/A=
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B50A6C14F688 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2022 23:38:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.944
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.944 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.857, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lear.ch
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LvDCBUdSD-IR for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2022 23:38:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [185.32.222.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B216C14F608 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 24 May 2022 23:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPV6:2001:420:c0c0:1011::9] ([IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1011:0:0:0:9]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 24P6cXRm2421757 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 25 May 2022 08:38:34 +0200
Authentication-Results: upstairs.ofcourseimright.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lear.ch
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1653460714; bh=JCSJTx+qVav6KU2ovnu5EyyP4YmnJZgGwvRgv3B2yQg=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=itn7amjoG+A3KiR6gM2Z5+O93MjRfstEf2o/qfJG2iWR4ekEAQvzI6E2hchMdGzmn rTRpUlQFgCCLXSAT/0lRpQsiBfjzjAzuRM0G0Ed8fjabG5zaAUFCLI2IitQdfnZpRY Di6EzYzS+dshMA4QldDLHp5CpmDvtxrz/X24WeDw=
Message-ID: <1aac4708-a439-b287-1c02-30fcfe83d298@lear.ch>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 08:38:31 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <MN2PR11MB375770AEBE5A992CC01156ACB9D79@MN2PR11MB3757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <A2C534F3-3162-4779-A637-BA42C5C44215@ietf.org> <MN2PR11MB37570AF809E4FA14CB3DFE3AB9D79@MN2PR11MB3757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <6031EEDF-C648-4492-97CC-CB0EDAB475D7@amsl.com> <a8987247-ccd9-6dfb-d89c-95245366b9b1@gmail.com> <7089978b-71d2-481f-9043-a73db2bb7304@beta.fastmail.com> <b3a19504-a33c-6b34-aecd-9bf168fb4c87@gmail.com> <735dfb17-53cb-49f0-b4cd-78d3d94773c2@beta.fastmail.com> <BA08C01D-B429-4846-8891-CBBDE71CD5C8@tzi.org>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
In-Reply-To: <BA08C01D-B429-4846-8891-CBBDE71CD5C8@tzi.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/g0na1el7QpdMuLNSj6FS4jd6GjI>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Scaling SVG graphics
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://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4885038852685644897=="
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Given the seeming uniformity of opinion that things are broken, is there 
a similar consensus as to what Good looks like, and has someone written 
that up?

Eliot


_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email