I’ve been thinking about Martin’s desire for the pretty single backslash
approach. I think the discussion should be about the probability of collisions
(I.e., files that cannot be folded due to false positives)
Assuming 95 printable characters (127-32) plus ‘\n’, a total of 96 characters,
the
No, there are cases where this fails. We went thru this before.
>>>
>>> Only if you have data with > 69 spaces in a row that needs to be
>>> preserved.
>>
>> More generally, anytime the fold occurs where space characters
>> follow.
>
> No, b/c you wouldn't fold there.
A human
Kent Watsen wrote:
>
>
> >> Now that IETF has officially moved to XML as the sole format
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean, can you provide a pointer? AFAICT, the
> > latest published RFC is still only available as txt and pdf.
>
> I meant that XML is the sole *input* format, per RFC 7990,
>> Now that IETF has officially moved to XML as the sole format
>
> I'm not sure what you mean, can you provide a pointer? AFAICT, the
> latest published RFC is still only available as txt and pdf.
I meant that XML is the sole *input* format, per RFC 7990, but you're
right about the XML not
"Adrian Farrel" wrote:
> >> Now that IETF has officially moved to XML as the sole format
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean, can you provide a pointer? AFAICT,
> > the latest published RFC is still only available as txt and pdf.
> >
> > If the only format was XML, why bother with any line
>> Now that IETF has officially moved to XML as the sole format
>
> I'm not sure what you mean, can you provide a pointer? AFAICT,
> the latest published RFC is still only available as txt and pdf.
>
> If the only format was XML, why bother with any line breaking at all?
I think maybe the IETF
Kent Watsen wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 4, 2019, at 11:04 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> >
> > Kent Watsen wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> But note that figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces
> >>> (they _can_ be outdented, if the lines are long enough).
> >>
> >>
> >> The days of scraping
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 11:04 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
> Kent Watsen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> But note that figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces
>>> (they _can_ be outdented, if the lines are long enough).
>>
>>
>> The days of scraping from plain-text RFCs are over [1].
The nice thing with the two slash approach is that it always works. It
doesn't matter whether it is text or XML, you just strip what is between
the two slashes.
The C '\' approach doesn't really work with indentation, and I'm not
convinced that extracting code from text RFCs is dead just
>> The days of scraping from plain-text RFCs are over [1]. Extracting,
>> if needed at all, should be from the XML, where there are no such
>> issues. Extracting from the plain-text output makes about as much
>> sense as extracting from the HTML or PDF outputs.
>
> I am confused. Are you saying
Kent Watsen wrote:
>
>
> > But note that figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces
> > (they _can_ be outdented, if the lines are long enough).
>
>
> The days of scraping from plain-text RFCs are over [1]. Extracting,
> if needed at all, should be from the XML, where there are no
> But note that figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces
> (they _can_ be outdented, if the lines are long enough).
The days of scraping from plain-text RFCs are over [1]. Extracting, if needed
at all, should be from the XML, where there are no such issues. Extracting from
the
I think that the folding works
pretty well, and the output is reasonably readable.
Thanks,
Rob
/martin
Cheers,
Adrian
-----Original Message-
From: Martin Bjorklund
Sent: 04 March 2019 11:49
To: rwil...@cisco.com
Cc: adr...@olddog.co.uk; joe...@bogus.com; netmod@ietf.org
Subje
of IETF routing \
functionality that a basic IP network \
device might be expected to support.",
/martin
>
> Cheers,
> Adrian
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Bjorklund
> Sent: 04 March 2019 11:49
ever growing list of things that we can't safely
> use this form of artwork folding on. Are there are any examples of
> stuff that we can safely use it on? ;-)
Just to be clear: my preference is for a single \ as described above,
but I am ok with the solution in the current draft (an addit
-
From: Martin Bjorklund
Sent: 04 March 2019 11:49
To: rwil...@cisco.com
Cc: adr...@olddog.co.uk; joe...@bogus.com; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?
"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote:
> But this behaviour is still different from the frequently
artin
Thanks,
Rob
-Original Message-
From: Martin Bjorklund
Sent: 04 March 2019 08:40
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton)
Cc: adr...@olddog.co.uk; joe...@bogus.com; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?
"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" mailto:r
rs.
/martin
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Bjorklund
> Sent: 04 March 2019 08:40
> To: Rob Wilton (rwilton)
> Cc: adr...@olddog.co.uk; joe...@bogus.com; netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod
; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?
"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" mailto:rwil...@cisco.com>> wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> I mostly agree with your last sentence.
>
> I think that if you always preserve whitespace then a single slash is
that it is better to be explicit, and
> using two slashes is one way of achieving this.
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
> From: netmod On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: 27 February 2019 09:41
> To: 'Joel Jaeggli'
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork f
achieving this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> From: netmod On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
>> Sent: 27 February 2019 09:41
>> To: 'Joel Jaeggli'
>> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support
From: netmod mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org>> On
> Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: 27 February 2019 09:41
> To: 'Joel Jaeggli' mailto:joe...@bogus.com>>
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual s
: netmod On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: 27 February 2019 09:41
To: 'Joel Jaeggli'
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?
Complete agreement, Joel.
What follows may look better in proportional fonts.
With a single slash we can wrap as follows
1234567
: Kent Watsen ; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] artwork folding: dual support modes?
On Feb 26, 2019, at 14:26, Adrian Farrel mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk> > wrote:
Hey.
I’ve been having this discussion with Kent off-line, but thought it should come
to the list.
I
> From: netmod On Behalf Of Kent Watsen
> Sent: 25 February 2019 22:22
> To: netmod@ietf.org
> 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 app
Watsen
Sent: 25 February 2019 22:22
To: netmod@ietf.org
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
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
27 matches
Mail list logo
