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

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:30:39 -0800

> From: Bob Braden [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>   *>
>   *> Leave the ASCII art for recreational use. If you want to 
> be regarded as
>   *> a professional organization then make sure that every 
> communication
>   *> looks professional. ASCII art screams 'amateur'.
> 
> I'm sorry, that is nonsense.  Was Jon Postel an amateur?
> 
> Fancy pictures CAN be a help for some explanatory purposes, 
> but they can also distract from a poorly written description.

I think that it is ridiculous for you to assert that you know what Jon
would be doing now if he were alive today. The worst possible tribute
you could make to Jon would be to freeze the IETF in its state on
October 16 1998.

In 1998 you could just about get away with plaintext, laserprinters were
common but had only become ubiquitous recently.

I discussed HTML RFCs with Jon a few months before he died. He expressed
concerns but not the ones that have been expressed here.

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

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:58:59 +0100

Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

> In 1998 you could just about get away with plaintext,
> laserprinters were common but had only become ubiquitous
> recently.

My drive I: (*nix folks: don't ask) is almost always a CD/ROM
with RfCs, directory I:\DOKU\RFC (next after I:\DOKU\POSTEL):

In this directory I find three PDFs (2616, 2636, and 2638) and
42 PS (1989-09-26: 1119 up to 1999-09-27: 2638 again).  If I
remove 2490, 2616, 2636, and 2638 I end up with 38 PS published
before 1998.
                         JFTR, Frank

P.S.:  Nothing's wrong with "fan sites" for RfCs, where you can
offer examples, sources, diagrams, FAQ, RSS, Wiki, and what else,
but the "essence" as a plain text RfC is IMO _the_ RfC feature.