I’m really confused with this. Isn’t it true that 100% of problems with git identifying changes where there weren’t actually changes, are caused by CRLFs? In other words, isn’t the best strategy to use as few of them as possible and allow the tools to soft wrap for display but otherwise work with very long lines that would not be suitable for display?
Jay > On 24 Apr 2025, at 05:20, Michael Richardson <m...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > Marc Petit-Huguenin <m...@petit-huguenin.org> wrote: >> Not sure I understand the difference. Can you give an example of both? >> Note that in the case of RFCXML, empty lines inside a <t> elements are >> removed. > > > OLPS: > Not sure I understand the difference. > Can you give an example of both? > Note that in the case of RFCXML, empty lines inside a <t> elements are > removed. > > NSNL: > Not sure I understand the difference. > Can you give an example of both? > Note that in the case of RFCXML, > empty lines inside a <t> elements are removed. > > > (I could make your "empty lines..." sentence longer to more clearly make the > point, but 80% of readers' MUA will wrap it and the point will be lost) > > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ > ] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails > [ > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org -- Jay Daley IETF Executive Director exec-direc...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org
