Hey.
I've been having this discussion with Kent off-line, but thought it should come to the list. I don't think it is a good idea to have two approaches. While it would be relatively easy to code for both approaches, it seems to add a degree of confusion if both have to be handled by the same code (consider deciding whether leading space characters are to be retained or not, something that can only be decided when the first non-space character is found), or by having different code for the two different cases. It doesn't seem to me that both cases are needed. We can pick one or the other. And *if* we want to allow manual folding so that indents can be made to make the document more human-readable then we have to use a leading '\' on continuation lines to show which spaces should be stripped and which retained. Cheers, Adrian From: netmod <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kent Watsen Sent: 25 February 2019 22:22 To: [email protected] Subject: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes? I had a chat with the tools team recently and, in the course of things, it was implied that the double backslash approach we have now was both surprising and non-intuitive. This got me thinking that we may have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. That is, currently we have a header that reads: NOTE: '\\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX) So why not *also* support a header that reads (note the singe slash): NOTE: '\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX) Whereby this second form only supports the folded line continuing on column 1 (no indents). Thoughts? Kent // contributor
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
