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

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 12 April 2021 16:46 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 6FAA83A09D8 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:46:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 IUzsdKLwOikP for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CD273A09D1 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dc178.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.193.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FJvlV1fW0zycY; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:46:46 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACB24MtXPct5iOmYSgG5yQVt=-y5=L1nXmkqb4=TsPNfgsQihQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:46:45 +0200
Cc: rfc-interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 639938805.233254-f956f8bfbb3ae654ffab62ab1a1cc909
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4915F484-A2C4-44B0-BAF8-B3CF09D9450F@tzi.org>
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>
To: Richard Barnes <richard.barnes@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/cUJwNp48tCqOKGaMvd3jr3CyRKc>
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: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:46:53 -0000

On 2021-04-12, at 16:55, Richard Barnes <richard.barnes@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Lawyers and judges are happy to cite by section.  Time to move on from tired, inaccurate metaphors.

Yes, but assessing the size of a document (which is what this thread is about) by section count doesn’t work so well.  The page count of the PDF is the only ready-made metric we have today.  Putting in another metric (e.g., word count(*)) might be helpful.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) ...where that often doesn’t actually count words but characters and then divides that count by 6 (or 5!), which better copes with different complexity grades.