Re: Accessibility of Documents (veering off-topic)

2006-01-11 Thread Douglas Otis
On Jan 10, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: Lucy, I suspect that they merely were making a spelling error, since I'm sure they were referring to folk who are truly essential, and therefore qualify as linch pins... I have never heard of a linching party. RFCs filled with base64

Re: Accessibility of Documents (veering off-topic)

2006-01-10 Thread Spencer Dawkins
Hi, Sam, Thank you for taking the time to explain this stuff to us. It is very helpful. Just on your last point: pictures: I guess someone might want to include a photo or other picture in an IETF spec. I'd kind of like to know why. Be sure to explain what the point of the photo is in the

Re: Accessibility of Documents (veering off-topic)

2006-01-10 Thread John C Klensin
--On Tuesday, 10 January, 2006 16:58 -0600 Spencer Dawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I'm also thinking that if an RFC is bad enough, having pictures of authors/editors might make it easier to recognize the guilty parties and organize a lynch mob, and that might do more to improve our

Re: Accessibility of Documents (veering off-topic)

2006-01-10 Thread Lucy E. Lynch
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, John C Klensin wrote: --On Tuesday, 10 January, 2006 16:58 -0600 Spencer Dawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I'm also thinking that if an RFC is bad enough, having pictures of authors/editors might make it easier to recognize the guilty parties and organize a

Re: Accessibility of Documents (veering off-topic)

2006-01-10 Thread Spencer Dawkins
Dear Dave and Lucy, watch how you use the word lynch please. As the oldest of six I'm a bit *sensitive* to mob comments. ;-) Lucy, I suspect that they merely were making a spelling error, since I'm sure they were referring to folk who are truly essential, and therefore qualify as linch