Quite frankly, I believe we can address the second step (which
of the requirements are not met today?) with a firm "none."
At some level that's clearly true, since RFCs are emerging at a brisk
clip.
I've seen two different sets of concerns.
One is that ASCII doesn't permit adequately beautiful pictures. If
that's the problem to be solved, it seems to me that a straightforward
solution would be to allow authors to submit image files along with
the ASCII text. I'd suggest requiring that the image format be GIF,
since it's simple, stable, well documented, widely supported in both
freeware and commercial software, and the patents have expired. (Or
maybe PNG, any stable public format will do.)
The other is that the editorial process is more tedious than it needs
to be, because RFCs have a mandatory structure that plain ASCII
doesn't express. RFC 2629 or 2629bis captures the structure while
being well supported in free and commercial software and, in a pinch,
legible without tools since it's ASCII underneath.
This confirms to me that what we need to decide is what the problem
is, since the solutions to each problem are straighforward.
R's,
John
PS: I gather that clay is quite stable if properly fired, and is
probably less subject to chipping and acid rain pitting than marble.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf