Randy,
Nosey, aren't we? :-)
If you must know, let's see: one grandfather worked in a
machine shop during WWII, retired in the late 50s; the other was
in the Army for WWI and a farmer, sawyer, moon-shiner and road
worker the rest of his life (being a farmer isn't a living, it's
a hobby). I doubt ASCII figured much into either of their lives.
ASCII isn't good enough for me, but PDF is useful where the
problem is really bad. Between them (counting PS as a variation
of PDF - especially since I have to convert PS to PDF to read it)
they are what there is.
I don't even pretend to know what will be good for my own
grandchildren because - so far - I don't even know that I will
ever have any.
My point in making a terse response was that all that was
asked for was objections. Sometimes, reasons are neither asked
for nor needed.
I suspect that - now that you know the reasons - you might
agree that this was one of those times...
--
Eric
--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: Randy.Dunlap [mailto:rdunlap(_at_)xenotime(_dot_)net]
--> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 1:21 PM
--> To: Gray, Eric
--> Cc: 'Sandy Wills'; Ken Raeburn; IETF General Discussion Mailing List
--> Subject: RE: objection to proposed change to "consensus"
-->
--> On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Gray, Eric wrote:
-->
--> > --> "I think we have reached substantial agreement on
--> the following
--> > --> statement: ASCII text was good enough for my
--> Grandfather, and it's
--> > --> going to be good enough for my grandchildren. Please
--> reply to this
--> > --> CfC if you object."
-->
--> IMO an objection should be required to also have an explanation.
-->
--> > I object.
-->
--> Why? to which parts? the grandfather/grandchildren?
-->
--> --
--> ~Randy
-->
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf