Paul Hoffman wrote:
It has to be tuned for the "or more" part of "one or more".
I can't fully parse your meaning, but I think I disagree.
Yes, I also think we disagree. I prefer one file and URL per
figure, avoiding all questions of TARs / ZIPs / JARs / TGZs
to bundle them.
The RFC Editor, on a case-by-case basis, can choose to have
one file containing multiple figures, or multiple files.
Can we maybe agree on "one subdirectory" for these "packs" ?
I'd like to have a "one-click interface" (IPR: ammazon) per
figure. You mentioned GIF and PDF. Of course it's somehow
possible to put more than one image in a GIF89a - after all
that's how "animated GIFs" work. But it's then a pain to
get at an individual image. Similar PDFs can have multiple
parts, but there is no way to address individual parts in
URLs.
Your art-proposal is more KISS than John's PDF-proposal and
therefore better, but IMO still not yet simple enough.
The important thing is that the URLs used by the RFC Editor
for any art needs to be long-lived and not tied to the
format of the artwork.
Yes, but mixing my rfc5110a.svg, rfc5110b.png, etc. idea with
your rfc5110.art idea is possible: rfc5110.a01, rfc5110.a02,
and so on.
Frank
--
P.S., unrelated, John wrote about UTF-8:
| I don't see any point in trying to discuss or critique such
| proposals until there is one...
http://purl.net/xyzzy/home/test/draft-hoffman-utf8-rfcs-01.txt
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf