Hi,
on 2006-06-15 19:52 Joel M. Halpern said the following:
> I would also observe that there is significant evidence that there is
> not a real problem here.
>
> It seems to me that if there was a real problem with the graphics,
> that folks would be publishing RFCs with PS or PDF forms, even if
> those were not normative.
> For the thousand RFCs starting with RFC 3000, there are 4 PS and 4
> PDF documents. In total, assuming that those are for different
> documents, that is still less than 1% if those RFCs published in that
> time period.
>
> I know some folks are vocal that there is a problem.
> But, the evidence suggests otherwise.
Oh, *good* point.
> In contrast, the evidence suggested for judging the experiment is
> going to be very limited, very subjective, and heavily influenced by
> the fact that the target are folks who are presumably particularly
> interested in a positive outcome.
>
> This experiment is a bad idea.
> I am sorry that this is not "constructive" input. But sometimes the
> right answer is "no."
> We already have provision for people to publish pretty pictures when
> they think that is helpful.
> If lots of folks do that, and if we conclude that those PDFs are more
> useful than the text documents, then we would have something to discuss.
Agreed. Thinking some more about this, the lack of inter-document
links seem to be a complaint that I hear much more often than the
lack of good graphics support.
Regards,
Henrik
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
