Subject: RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML)

From: "Yaakov Stein" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:48:07 +0200

>It's good that protocols needing more than 72 ASCII characters are 
>forbidden.

Just imagine what elegantly simple protocols we would have
if we required the descriptions to be in Morse code.

Y(J)S

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:30:23 +0900

> if we required the descriptions to be in Morse code.

Good idea.

It's a better approach to enforce much simpler protocols.

						Masataka Ohta

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:39:17 -0500

For true archival storage, nothing can beat the elegance and  
simplicity of engravings on stone.

I believe that this site in Georgia has plenty  of room for even the  
most complicated RFC's :

http://www.cviog.uga.edu/Projects/gainfo/statues/guidestones.htm

I had occasion to discuss this thread recently with some  
participants, and we agreed that this  seems to be the direction it's  
heading.

I suspect it would also help to keep protocols simple.

(Financial disclosure : I have  relatives who own quarries in this  
area.)

Regards
Marshall Eubanks