Re: [Tools-discuss] [rfc-i] what metric replaces page-count?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 13 April 2021 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E33753A1D1E for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:09:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 m4lpiuReg835 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:09:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64F0F3A1D0C for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C44538FF5; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:16:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id gbjibd9iT1y7; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:16:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 982ED38FF1; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:16:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53D1D1150; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:09:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, rfc-interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <20210412230913.GX9612@localhost>
References: <20557.1618171860@localhost> <F35C8691-ADA2-4DEC-B24A-0DFB5B76567F@tzi.org> <66fd7812-4d2c-bf9d-d4bf-16c501754d7e@gmail.com> <CACB24MtXPct5iOmYSgG5yQVt=-y5=L1nXmkqb4=TsPNfgsQihQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210412230913.GX9612@localhost>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:09:21 -0400
Message-ID: <22936.1618330161@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/QXH7myd8k_ndcg2eD1gx_HpGwPs>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [rfc-i] what metric replaces page-count?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:09:31 -0000

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
    > But Michael was not asking about citations.  He was asking for a
    > complexity metric.

Thank you.

    > 8.   Basic encoding rules
    > ...
    > 8.19 Encoding of an object identifier value

    > 8.19.1 The encoding of an object identifier value shall be primitive.

I personally find this presentation ugly and very disruptive to reading.
If the size of the "8.19.1" could diminish such that it was significantly
smaller, than I'd be happy.  That might be a matter of some extra CSS.
(When CSS was invented, I was told we were supposed to be able to cascade
local CSS, but in practice, that has always been difficult)

    > This is almost like having paragraph numbering as a sort of sub-section
    > numbering, except that you can see that's not quite the rule (e.g.,
    > x.690 section 8.19.2 has two paragraphs).  But I would be fine with that
    > too.

So, in your view, the size metric would then be the number of sections.
{I do not support revisiting the decision}

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