[Techspec] Re: RFC Editor SOW Review

Stewart Bryant wrote:

> The SOW says:
>
> g. Document Format Conversions
> 1) Accept as input ascii text files and publish documents as ascii text
> files,postscript files, and pdf files
>
> 2) Accept supplemental source files that may contain information such
> as: code, formal descriptions (XML, ASN.1, etc.) graphics, data files, 
> etc.
>
> 3) Publish documents as ascii text, postscript, and pdf files
>
> It is possible that the IETF will at some time in the future migrate
> to an input format other than ASCII text. Please can we
> amend the SOW to:
>
> a) Allow the IETF to experiment with the production of RFCs
> based on text formats other than ASCII text.
>
> b) Allow the IETF the ability to introduce at some time in the
> future an alternative input format to ASCII text if it so chooses.
>
> - Stewart

Looking at the SOW again, it seems to completely ignore RFC2223.txt
section 1 that says:

"While the primary RFCs is always an ASCII text file, secondary or
alternative versions of RFC may be provided in PostScript.  This
decision is motivated by the desire to include diagrams, drawings,
and such in RFCs.  PostScript documents (on paper only, so far) are
visually more appealing and have better readability."

and also

Guidelines to Authors of Internet-Drafts section 2 that says:

"PostScript and/or PDF are acceptable....."

- Stewart

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
Techspec@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec