IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Tools-discuss] Re: [Ext] PDF [Re: Tools team meeting tomorrow 9 July 2024 1800 UTC]

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Tue, 09 July 2024 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
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 882ABC15152F; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 648zozb8H3Bq; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1034.google.com (mail-pj1-x1034.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 1E48AC14F70D; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1034.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c7fa0c9a8cso3087756a91.1; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1720538396; x=1721143196; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CLgQQrNUbEv49FGZmufPd3gsQqgtnm6W0uZp9uhh/JA=; b=dAdGN6L06mQYEVFQNo5s1RdaXuYxgGv9URNgfJjGNdr3TnA0om/GuX0G7j82G3Zk+l M0QETMe5utr5rAlOWfqdyyxeDSdIQIH8d3OPlClYPKMA5XB33XHscrfWJOvhrCv7pkdF cl1tJNCqPmfKWPmgj5lcVV1Y1COc+MKh4pRlhQ7TN6+kemKiNPZOeXxvDmiLwmK7TWlM YGB2EE17o6Q07oOjtkyRIJKzWRHH5xWJdrpj1ywK2pSCAijt1i3neeWh21yXyJeCxKoF me0SUdZEEzvz9KiUY4+2vfXkrfdxQJxGHSOGNVWg+HLxQHKbjy4YzmGUj8Y8pvFjPULG 9vnw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720538396; x=1721143196; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=CLgQQrNUbEv49FGZmufPd3gsQqgtnm6W0uZp9uhh/JA=; b=YbuDtsPGgMpCpFfoGtDInIj3hI8Ky5+FLNIRnDdyWBF6W1sXCWoqk2mDmpSbJ8uf5B oIMYNEqEK2X4pOeNgtYivreMX6oWkXSKx3+HYoY/8HLIPoO3J2ajIEgzqX6NOtC8JRvP 4/Si1bgX5f4fAP36+vUBYDE6kU/Qr8gKovg9dyKSmZTmIPENJelvTJdlambvdb1vRmQ6 IwBarhmeInSnogdQmWMq/lCG2P4H0OVyM8+JJTj7vTHrU55gB5Jv6MjSssYjqiF2qs0v qu5d0sDOhKcMixqHpe1+wewMIASl6APYV3v98gX2A5TXgBSEwNjyH1wC4Bg74vRC9dCc 1WYg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXa9e4rZknoTXYOrqx3FIAAHvKUEWCr5iG91zUmomdjrRHBIwP3FxKCeMDDZPh4N7aOk7fQ1nk6FDTPbmENh/zeWA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxpCS4XhyQZ6rqfyclBoQFA0Pv0JERuoqDcJSTyH2ZNbNuOLEA4 yhfwuChqMQsEVAlOjhf68stXDZLBglFJtbKqoG3fkk7T8rlu1H4WbeEst14vQac78rmwSNmkRzl 3OamgtHB1pPRnqJnkPYOIGCAW4eY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEb73ZTUysqWRPQNrwrp/IkiOTVG7J/NRk9gKO9gsPt0/Rnx5ITW2nyjZxzNMHUJYr083XZQ6lTrW7B4JIV7Ds=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1956:b0:2c8:f3b4:a3df with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2ca35d52f51mr2293667a91.42.1720538396347; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:19:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <336856cc-9986-43ba-bc26-f5c96aaa9521@nostrum.com> <A4157066-C7BA-4560-812A-21DB8A063AC4@tzi.org> <A335A99C-F06B-479B-BF33-10137A58DDFA@eggert.org> <A757BF99-2FC1-41FD-9D8E-D1388C798606@tzi.org> <2DDDE58D-ABB8-44B6-9674-6EE305757031@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <2DDDE58D-ABB8-44B6-9674-6EE305757031@icann.org>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 11:19:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU3Uz8DgCQmN=feqVrgMkQiABXbHHFJkHcq0NnjQL3rYow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000efd4b3061cd20f45"
Message-ID-Hash: 2PCSBV5YWOU2CAKELBFTGFUZUD5ZKL7F
X-Message-ID-Hash: 2PCSBV5YWOU2CAKELBFTGFUZUD5ZKL7F
X-MailFrom: agmalis@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tools-discuss.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>, Working Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Tools-discuss] Re: [Ext] PDF [Re: Tools team meeting tomorrow 9 July 2024 1800 UTC]
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/XtGtHmYP6g4ZMVr5hxPMmPHHRKs>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tools-discuss-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tools-discuss-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tools-discuss-leave@ietf.org>

Even if we continue to produce PDFs for RFCs, I doubt that there's much
utility for drafts. There's no reason why it has to be the same for drafts
as for RFCs. It's really up to the RSWG/RSAB for one and the IESG for the
other.

Cheers,
Andy


On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 11:00 AM Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On Jul 9, 2024, at 03:37, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 9. Jul 2024, at 08:04, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Jul 8, 2024, at 21:34, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> >>> Could we maybe stop pdfizing things in weird ways and simply build the
> correct PDF form on I-D submission?
> >>> The current state is just such a waste of time.
> >>
> >> I have a more radical proposal: Stop PDFing completely,
> >
> > I don't think we should do that as long as PDF is one of the
> presentation forms we get of an RFC.
>
> What is the logic here? Drafts are quite temporary, RFCs are forever, so
> the rules can be different.
>
> > (And we shouldn’t stop that either, but that is an RSWG issue.)
>
> I disagree with the former, but agree with the latter. After the current
> RSWG work settles a bit, and we have better data from the Tools Team, it
> might be time to revisit the idea that we publish RFCs in PDF format at all.
>
> >> and instead make sure that browsers can print-to-PDF the HTML version
> correctly.
> >
> > That is certainly a good thing and can be pursued independently.
>
> +1
>
> > The actual requirement here is that, for I-Ds, reviewers can look at
> useful previews of all the presentation forms that will be in the RFC even
> before RPC does its magic.
>
> "useful" carries a lot of weight here, particularly when the text will
> change between the last draft and the RFC itself. For the few authors that
> care about this, the RFC Editor can have a portal where you tell it a
> current draft and it does a one-time conversion to PDF using their exact
> PDFing tool chain.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
>
>

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status