Re: [Tools-discuss] UTF-8 box characters with wavy lines in XML2RFC v3 draft

Michael Richardson <> Wed, 06 November 2019 15:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6EB120C54 for <>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 07:10:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nxEOzRpBXyUo for <>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 07:10:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51650120904 for <>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 07:10:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDFC3818F; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:07:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFEB614; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:10:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: Tom Pusateri <>
cc: tools-discuss <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
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-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 10:10:43 -0500
Message-ID: <16044.1573053043@localhost>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] UTF-8 box characters with wavy lines in XML2RFC v3 draft
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 15:10:50 -0000

Tom Pusateri <>; wrote:
    > Also, note how the box characters in the v3 HTML version end up are
    > unaligned? There is probably something going wrong here in the CSS or
    > maybe our source but I’m not sure what. Maybe we’re not using the
    > correct vertical bar? Any help on that would be appreciated so we don’t
    > get wavy lines.

I didn't see anything unaligned... maybe some CSS didn't load yesterday due
to the attack?

I do like how nice those diagrams look; is there a reason you didn't use box
characters for the packet layout?  I now feel that we ought have a
meta-language to generate nice packet layouts... I once worked on an ID for
such a thing.

Michael Richardson <>;, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-