Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ginosko!uunet!mcsun!unido!uniol!lehners
From: lehners@uniol.UUCP (Joerg Lehners)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Comment on RFC1124 (?)
Message-ID: <871@uniol.UUCP>
Date: 28 Sep 89 22:19:23 GMT
References: <5446@asylum.SF.CA.US> <932@manta.NOSC.MIL> <1989Sep28.030658.4118@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu>
Organization: University of Oldenburg, W-Germany
Lines: 33
zweig@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu (Johnny Zweig) writes:
>It seems the best thing to do is to put PostScript stuff _somewhere else_. I
>like being able to do "lpr RFCxxx" and have the right thing happen -- and I
>imagine people who don't have PostScript printers around would be even more
>adamant on the point.
Same with me, except I don't print the RFC often.
I almost all time just do an 'more Rfc/Rfc' to look up
some details.
Printouts get lost too often. And what about looking up words.
I would like to be able to do for example: 'grep TTL Rfc/rfc*'.
>It seems that complicated drawings ought to go into some kind of companion
>document that would be referenced (with good old [1]...[n] in plain ASCII)
>in the RFC-proper.
>I think that one can go a long way with - + | _ / \ < and >. Certainly
>anything that can't be described without a comlicated drawing ought to be
>rephrased. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but a standard should be
>clear enough not to need thousands of words.
Yes. I really like the drawings in rfc793. It's good enough and visisble on
every character only terminal. For details see the Text !
What about that:
Let all RFCxxxx and the new in the old style, build some
RFCxxxx.ps files for the Postscript-Version. But they should NOT differ
in contents !
Joerg
--
/ Joerg Lehners | Fachbereich 10 Informatik ARBI \
| | Universitaet Oldenburg |
| BITNET/EARN: 066065@DOLUNI1.BITNET | Ammerlaender Heerstrasse 114-118 |
\ UUCP/Eunet: lehners@uniol.uucp | D-2900 Oldenburg /