IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tools-discuss] Feedback on proposed update to document htmlization

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 24 July 2022 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@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 0146FC14F6EC for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 10:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.666
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=1.242, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 vAGAZpa2tz17 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 10:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (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 B9C5AC14F613 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 10:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:1232:144:6e88:14ff:fe34:93bc]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 189DA1F448; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 17:55:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 2953B1A0429; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 13:55:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
cc: Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <AAB8DF10-D742-41ED-9816-F762C0E37FCF@eggert.org>
References: <AAB8DF10-D742-41ED-9816-F762C0E37FCF@eggert.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> message dated "Sun, 24 Jul 2022 11:12:29 -0400."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7.1; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 13:55:00 -0400
Message-ID: <36220.1658685300@dooku>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/bHjmcObyPTHL_oGlz6oYdonx9A0>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Feedback on proposed update to document htmlization
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 17:55:08 -0000

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
    > I have a development instance with the changes running on my laptop
    > here at the IETF. You can go to
    > http://31.133.128.123:8000/doc/html/draft-ietf-cbor-file-magic-12 to
    > see what it looks like. (Other URLs also work of course.)

What a good document to pick.  The authors are really really cool! :-0

I sure like that right-hand panel.
I assume it is pure-CSS doing this?
A slightly darker "white" on the right might be good.

What does it look like if the txt has not been paginated?
Are there RFCs which are canonical txt (rather than XML), but which have no pagination?



--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email