on 2005-12-04 08:17 Yaakov Stein said the following:
Why should any electronic format be normative?
The normative version should be the hardcopy print-out,
and any editing tool that can produce a precisely reproducible print-out
should be allowed.
This should hold for artwork as well.
I guess here we differ to some degree in our views - I would rather say
that if any single presentation format should be normative, it should
be the one that people read during last call and during the IESG approval
process. I think that's quite independent of the ability to produce
precisely reproducible paper copies.
I'm not sure, though, how hard the requirement on one single normative
presentation format is. If all 3 or 5 (or whatever) formats in common
use can easily and consistently be generated from the same source, does
Today, any RFC2629 (or rfc2629bis) source can be consistently turned
into HTML, XHTML, PDF, CHM and more, by using various combinations of
xml2rfc, rfc2629xslt, xsl11toFop, xml2rfcpdf. The only major gap we
have is really the ability to turn rfc2629bis sources which contain
diagrams in image formats automatically into good ASCII artwork.
With enough confidence in the consistency of the generated output,
we might not care so much any more about whether it was the PDF/A version,
the ASCII version, or the printed page which was normative...
Of course, this only holds if the source from which the various formats
can be produced is as easily available as any single presentation format.
Ietf mailing list