Why we shouldn' use ASCII text

ASCII text shouldn't be accepted because:

Pen and paper is by far the most portable format on the planet and beyond. For example, there are more people on this planet that have access to a pen and paper than a computer. Heck, my grandmother refuses to buy a computer even though she can afford it, but she can sure write a mean letter. Besides, even if you don't have a pen and paper, you can usually find a scrap and a pen that's been left behind by someone.

Pen and paper is much easier when you're working with a "dumb" person. Pretty much any person can read text on a piece of paper, but have you ever tried to get someone to read e-mail who has never seen a computer before?

And when you say ASCII, which font do you mean:
Webdings
Wingdings
Symbol
(Let's see who can translate that...)

At least when I write a letter, that is the letter than ends up on the paper. I mean sure, you could read the text and try to figure out whether or not the symbols on the screen are intelligible, but how much of a hassle is that?

Let's not even talk about EBCDIC. I mean does anyone even use that anymore?

Finally, the technology used by the various representatives to the IETF should not be looked as a model for the IETF. They have a specific set of requirements that they have for their communications related to their employment or personal lives. The IETF should be making their documents readable by anyone who wants to comment, whether they own a computer or not.

All in good fun... ;-)

Taylor

At 08:04 AM 2/22/01 -0500, David C Lawrence wrote:

> > Also, why isn't HTML an accepted format for Internet Drafts, pretty
> > much everyone on the planet should be able to read an HTML file (even
> > using Lynx on a terminal)?
>
> and that goes for pdf too, given that the irs uses it too :)

It isn't accepted because flat, plain ASCII text is by far the most
portable format on the planet and beyond. For example, there are
plenty of IETFers who still read the drafts in email, and still use
email clients that don't handle HTML natively.

It is easiest to work with when you are on a "dumb" device. Pretty
much any program that can handle text at all can handle unadorned
ASCII, but HTML can be much more of a nuisance.

Also, when you say "read an HTML file", what HTML do you mean?
-//IETF//DTD HTML Strict Level 0//EN//2.0?
-//W3C//ENTITIES Full Latin 1//EN//HTML?
-//SQ//DTD HTML 2.0 HoTMetaL + extensions//EN?

Once you decide on that, how do you make sure everyone's favorite
authoring tools are putting out compliant documents? Sure, a verifier
can be run on them. For some of these tools, however, getting them to
generate a document that is compliant with a particular document type
can be a frustrating experience when the user is told the document
won't be accepted if it isn't compliant.

PDF is an even bigger headache. Even many mail clients that purport
to handle HTML natively do not handle PDF, and operating systems
mostly don't even ship with a viewer. Forget about trying to look at
PDF on a dumb device or process it with standard text tools like
Unix's "grep". And how widespread are freely available PDF authoring
tools?

Finally, the technology used by the USA's IRS (nationwide taxing
authority) should not be looked to as a model for the IETF. They have
a very specific set of requirements for their documents -- that forms
appear in an especially consistent way to ease the processing of the
tremendous volume of paperwork that they process. While a consistent
outline is important for IETF documents, the same degree of precision
in reproduction is not needed for us.

*****************************************************************************

P. Taylor Salman OPNET Technologies, Inc.

Manager, Market Research 7255 Woodmont Avenue

Phone: 202-364-4700x2297 Suite 250

Fax: 202-364-8551 Bethesda, MD 20814-7904

Cell: 202-427-3319 www.opnet.com

******************************************************************************