Julian Reschke wrote:
data URIs are available in 3 out of 4 major browsers, with IE8 adding
them as well.
I thought IE8 had some fairly annoying limitations on their use?
format. But data: URLs are not as widely supported as we'd like. Nor
is MHTML. Having multiple files per document is less attractive.
That's true, but the other proposal that's on the table also requires
multiple files.
sure, but I'm not taking that proposal seriously :)
I'm not saying [X]HTML RFCs are an inherently bad idea, just that
they're not as simple to get right as it might seem.
That's true, but I would expect *less* discussions as compared to just
using PDF (for everything).
IMHO, the only thing PDF has going for it is that (sadly) it's easier to
print PDF correctly on most computers than it is to print plain text.
Pretty much everything else about PDF, IMHO, makes it a poor choice for
most new RFCs. (though it's probably slightly better than PostScript
such as was used in the past).
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf