[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML)

2005-11-15 10:23:28

  *> Watching engineers implement specs as code I note that most use
  *> secondary sources such as O'Rielly in preference to the supposedly
  *> authoritative IETF specs. The lack of readability is a major reason.
  *> This is not the case with W3C specs. 
  *> There is very little point spending time perfecting text that is only
  *> ever going to be read by the author of the O'Rielly nutshell book.
  *> The real standard is the bits on the real wire. If those are coded from
  *> O'Rielly then O'Rielly, not the IETF is the standards setter.
  *> I don't recall seeing ASCII art in O'Rielly books.

I am certainly not going to claim that ASCII art is God's Gift to
Implementers, but I have a hard time believing that the alleged
superiority of the O'Reilly specs is due to the artistic quality
of their diagrams, as opposed, say, to the quality of their prose.

  *> Leave the ASCII art for recreational use. If you want to be regarded as
  *> a professional organization then make sure that every communication
  *> looks professional. ASCII art screams 'amateur'.

I'm sorry, that is nonsense.  Was Jon Postel an amateur?

Fancy pictures CAN be a help for some explanatory purposes, but they
can also distract from a poorly written description.

Bob Braden


Ietf mailing list

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