IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII

Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@gmail.com> Thu, 11 March 2010 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <jmamodio@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB893A6E54 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:11:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N9b6MGL7V5df for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:11:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-px0-f187.google.com (mail-px0-f187.google.com [209.85.216.187]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEFC63A6E98 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:44:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pxi17 with SMTP id 17so14084pxi.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:44:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=MGSUnjFhg9/Y6vB1Em0DZQ+TpGD1tdxv2wu28m8nY4Q=; b=qDJ6Jr/jJE5SQHevWjbI4WWnY2zV6DvvogCQfv3k50cLlnD0nQy9BAlorkE8iNFU6G kdRE8J5t+LJ0BZGstRikJ0fpH0a8AzihZS/K3gmq1TvV/rzSQwvI0Uqr16hpohr7kMZN ihCj9lLlOa90Vgfa4VIYMdgNFCUtbCMSCus7c=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=DTzMXnVZeeS3JhqMDx78N6LkirtatKK4UGnUsOZiCMAMvHvLaYvbOD5Y9zeiW3sc23 qGgD/H20QafvZ9g1bJgNutuiYs+NS46Fq9h1ckJCF+oSKxX9JAHGhxOnTaOOVlbw6cyW sV0c2fb56rba+Egzojjg+YiYsPfJ/Kzm7iB0E=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.195.7 with SMTP id s7mr1533333wff.174.1268333088069; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:44:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4B992481.1010401@gmx.de>
References: <1028365c1003110732o1b2ffa1bmd97cffbb3985dde0@mail.gmail.com> <202705b1003110854j232d8b19ye17075b9c527a34f@mail.gmail.com> <4B992481.1010401@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:44:47 -0600
Message-ID: <202705b1003111044w3ea1341fvdfba53abd3a75665@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII
From: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:11:59 -0000

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 11.03.2010 17:54, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>>
>> Besides your eyes, (only one in some cases), you don't need any extra
>> junkware to be able to read the RFCs, even better, without eyes you
>> still can do it since text to speech works very nicely with ASCII.
>> ...
>
> I'd claim that accessibility for properly authored HTML will actually be
> better, for instance the markup can express whether something is prose or
> artwork.

HTML uses ASCII as far as I remember, some tags, URIs and URLs may be
impossible to decipher these days but still ASCII (I've to admit that
some folks still use-abuse extended ASCII on HTML pages instead proper
encoding and lang selection).

About text to speech, it only takes a forward or going trough one of
the stupid no context aware robo-translators and you will get your t2s
interface reciting "gee tee ampersand semicolon greater than eich ref
equal lower than bee greater than ..." I guess you get the point.

And I agree with Martin, all other formats add a lot of unnecessary
crap to the documents, embedded fonts, meta-crap data, hooks to track
document changes.

And ASCII is more eco-friendly :-)

Cheers
Jorge

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email