Re: Publishing RFCs in PDF Formal

["Frank Ellermann" <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz at gmail.com>]

Julian Reschke wrote:

>> I'm not saying [X]HTML RFCs are an inherently bad idea, just that
>> they're not as simple to get right as it might seem.
 
> That's true, but I would expect *less* discussions as compared to
> just using PDF (for everything).

For the now dead IONs the restriction was roughly "no nonsense".
I guess we could hash out a flat DTD for an IETF subset of XHTML
1.0 transitional working with old HTML 3.2 browsers, while still
allowing the CSS for decorations.

No data URIs of course.  If the goal is one file we could try to
fix the weird ooXML "pack" non-URI scheme (a persistently parked
draft, they know that I'd request HISTOTRIC one second after it
expires, therefore they keep it alive, a congenial subversion :-)

 Frank
-- 
<http://tinyurl.com/5q82dg>


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf