Friendly amendment. (To fix a run-on sentences.) "There are some Unicode characters that cannot be displayed (such as control and whitespace characters). Additionally, many characters are also not widely available in the font packages that are available to viewers. While HTML and PDF formats render any character that has a glyph, that can involve additional steps in preparation. The text publication format [RFC7994] of an RFC, as well as excerpts copied from an RFC, are displayed using the font packages supplied by the viewer, which might not include the necessary glyphs. RFCs need to include descriptions of any such characters."
But yes, this is fine. On Thu, May 28, 2026, at 20:51, Pete Resnick wrote: > I might suggest shortening it a bit: > > "There are some Unicode characters that cannot be displayed (such as > control and whitespace characters). Additionally, many characters are > also not widely available in the font packages that are available to > viewers. While HTML and PDF formats render any character that has a > glyph, that can involve additional steps in preparation, and the text > publication format [RFC7994] of an RFC, as well as excerpts copied from > an RFC, are displayed using the font packages supplied by the viewer, > which might not include the necessary glyphs. RFCs need to include > descriptions of any such characters." > > But otherwise, unless there are objections from others, and if the RSOC > is comfortable with this late-breaking change, I'd say the editor can > throw this in (in whichever form he prefers). > > pr > -- > Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ > All connections to the world are tenuous at best > > -- > rswg mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
