ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: HTML better for small PDAs

2001-02-26 15:40:02
vern - i hope we can agree that i don't fall under the categorization of

those who have not yet found an opportunity to Contribute To The Standards
Process

if we disagree on this, then discard this message.

i will tell you why i think it is a good idea that the I-D repository accept
XML versions of drafts, whilst retaining the .txt versions as the "official"
ones (assuming that the term "official internet-draft" isn't oxymoronic).

the text format we use for I-Ds and RFCs is final form. it works great for
printing. it works pretty well for viewing on a nice screen. it doesn't work
well on a small screen.

the advantage of using something like XML is that it is an intermediate
form. this means that i can write programs that convert it to different
final forms, e.g., something that looks nice on a pda. today i flew from
sacramento to boston, rather than carrying around 500 pages of recent I-Ds,
i loaded them onto my ipaq. although i avoided a trip to the chiropractor
for my back, i now have to see him for the rsi i got from having to scroll
left-right in addition to up-down.

i don't know if html is better for small PDAs, and frankly, i don't care.
what i do care about is the fact that ASCII memos can't be reformatted. that
is just plain silly.

so, i suggest a simple experiment: let the I-D repository store alternative
versions of drafts in addition to the .txt versions. try this out for 9
months and see if people find it useful or not. is this really asking so
much?

/mtr




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>