On Saturday, 5 January 2013 at 19:54:11 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
In other words, bad marketing. Unfortunate, since it sounds
like a good
idea upon my first glance of it (aside from its choice to use
XML for
certain things, which IMO is too much of an _unnecessary_
baggage for
something as low level as BEEP.)
I lost interest when I saw the XML mentions.
I don't really get why some software engineers seem to think
that in
20xx they can write up a series of code-numbered legalese-esque
documents (and with no formatting, and with baked-in page-breaks
despite being in electronic format), and expect that people
will pay
attention to it.
The horrific formatting of those RFCs surprised me also.
It's kinda like how academic folk will write overly-convoluted
(almost
patent-like) explanations, employ other forms of obfuscation
such as
calling a summary or intro an "abstract" (just because some
outdated
standard tells them to), stick it all into a multi-column PDF,
and then
wonder why the non-academic side never bothers to pay any
attention.
You assume they want someone to pay attention. The real goal is
slip under the radar, keep collecting the free government money
for doing nothing of any import.
