On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Phillip
Hallam-Baker<hallam(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
The TXT versions do not print on my printer and have not printed
reliably on any printer I have ever owned.
Yes, and that history goes back a couple of decades for me.
I know that some UNIX folk just love to rub the noses of the rest of
us in this dog poop but it gets tiresome. Just because it works for
some people does not mean that it is the best way to do things.
Hey, I'm as Unix-y a person as there is, and simultaneously as fierce
a despiser as you can find of 80-character 66-line hard-to-read
impossible-to-print ignores-decades-of-advances-in-publishing-tech
i18n-oblivious ASCIIlicious IETF worst practices.
Another data point, by the way. I am a major consumer of the Internet
through a mobile device (an Android phone in my case, but whatever).
RFCs are essentially unusable on this device in the legacy text
format, but work fine in xml2rfc-generated HTML.
I think that in the big picture, usability on a mobile device is
several times as important as usability on the hypothetical
ASCII-capable line printer that presumably must have once existed
somewhere.
The W3C has worked out how to print professional looking standards in
a format that we can safely assume will be readable for the next
thousand years at least. We will lose the ability to read bits long
before we lose the ability to read HTML, or for that matter reverse
engineer PDF.
Yes, although I wouldn't recommend adopting their publishing system.
Can we please join the current millennium? I'd be happy to help.
-Tim
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf