Re: text/enriched draft critique

> Excerpts from internet.ietf-822: 21-Mar-93 text/enriched
> draft critique Dana S Emery(_at_)umail(_dot_)umd(_dot_)e (8062*)


> I would like to see seperate "Big" and "Small" states recomended,
> so that
> <Bigger> and <Smaller> index into seperate tables.  This will allow a
> slightly
> more compact  description, especially if a document employs both a Small
> and a
> Big size alternatly:

> <Smaller>
>         ...are described in the following sections.
>         <Bigger><Bold>Formatting Commands</Bold></b>

> The text/enriched formatting commands...according to
> type.

> <Bigger><Bold>Font-Changing
> Commands</Bold></Bigger>

> The following formatting commands are intended to
> alter...
>         </Smaller>

> would suffice, instead of the lengthier:

> <Smaller>
>         ...are described in the following sections.
>         </Smaller><Bigger><Bold>Formatting
> Commands</Bold></b>

> The text/enriched formatting commands...according to
> type.

> <Bigger><Bold>Font-Changing
> Commands</Bold></Bigger>

> <Smaller>The following formatting commands are intended
> to alter...
>         </Smaller>

Yuck.  Too confusing.  And how do I encode text that is two levels of
smaller and contains a piece that is only one level smaller?  That is:
	<smaller><smaller>four points 
	smaller<bigger> two points
	smaller</bigger>still four points
	smaller</smaller></smaller>