Re: [Ltru] issue #1059 Horizontal whitespace

["Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>]

No objection then.

‎Mark

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>
To: "'Randy Presuhn'" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>; "LTRU Working Group"
<ltru at ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 10:01
Subject: RE: [Ltru] issue #1059 Horizontal whitespace


> Hi,
>
> +1
>
> I agree with Randy - machine-readable formats are regularly
> published in RFCs, without problems - the user community and
> IANA have scripts and C tools to strip the RFC artifacts from
> the various machine-readable formats.
>
> Cheers,
> - Ira
>
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
> PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI  49839
> phone: +1-906-494-2434
> email: imcdonald at sharplabs.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org
> > [mailto:ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org]On
> > Behalf Of Randy Presuhn
> > Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 6:54 PM
> > To: LTRU Working Group
> > Subject: [Ltru] issue #1059 Horizontal whitespace
> >
> >
> > Hi -
> >
> > > From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>
> > > To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>; "LTRU
> > Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 3:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Horizontal whitespace (was Re: [Ltru] Re: I-D
> > ACTION:draft-ietf-ltru-initial-01.txt)
> > >
> >
> > > I agree with the goal. I'd suggest explaining in a bit more
> > detail, however:
> > >
> > >     Headers, footers, line breaks, and other
> > >    vertical whitespace introduced by the RFC process are not
> > >    significant.  Leading horizontal whitespace indicates a continued
> > >    line in the record-jar format, and must not be deleted.=>
> > >
> > > In the IANA registry that is produced from this document in
> > the record-jar
> > > format, leading horizontal whitespace is significant, and
> > indicates a
> > > continued line. However, in this document, headers,
> > footers, line breaks,
> > > and other whitespace is introduced by the RFC process. To correctly
> > > interpret the data in this document, these extraneous
> > characters must be
> > > disregarded. In particular, a number of horizontal
> > whitespace characters
> > > that is greater than what is found on the 'File-Date' line
> > indicates a
> > > continued line in the record-jar format, and must not be deleted.
> > ...
> >
> > As a contributor who has edited RFCs establishing registries,
> > and who has
> > chaired WGs producing such RFCs, I feel quite confident in
> > saying that this
> > is complete and total over-kill.  We don't do this for ABNF,
> > MIB modules,
> > ASN.1 modules, or any of the other machine-parseable stuff that finds
> > itself published in RFCs.  The folks at IANA have repeatedly
> > proven that
> > they know enough to strip headers, footers, etc.  I could
> > support Doug's
> > original proposal because it addressed a not-100%-obvious
> > potential problem,
> > but I can't support this amended proposal.  If the rest of
> > the WG supports
> > it, I won't oppose it, but I think the amended proposal would
> > set a bad precedent.
> >
> > Randy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ltru mailing list
> > Ltru at lists.ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>
>



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru