Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!husc6!m2c!jjmhome!cpoint!martillo
From: martillo@cpoint.UUCP (Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Comment on RFC1124 (?)
Summary: Ecrasez l'Islam!
Message-ID: <2633@cpoint.UUCP>
Date: 28 Sep 89 16:15:51 GMT
References: <5446@asylum.SF.CA.US>
Reply-To: martillo@cpoint.UUCP (Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo)
Organization: Clearpoint Research Corp., Hopkinton Mass.
Lines: 52

In article <5446@asylum.SF.CA.US> karl@asylum.SF.CA.US (Karl Auerbach) writes:
>RFC1124 came out with a discussion of policy issues of interconnected
>networks.  Interesting and important stuff.

>Now, it seems, according to RFC1111, that postscript is OK for RFC's,
>(including postscript that was obviously generated by a word or text
>processor.)

>So: can anyone make reasonable comment on stuff that looks like what
>follows?  Can anyone do a reasonable machine-based content search?
>Can I send it though my automated indexing tools?  Can I make a
>nice e-mail reply with appropriate selections for context?

>No.

>I thought we were working on communications, not obfuscation.

>I propose that we ban postscript RFCs.

>			--karl--

The logic of Auerbach's proposal is compelling.  As Prime Computer
Corporation began self-destructing, part of this self-destructing
evinced itself in the lack of communication between different groups
within the company.  This lack of communication was aided by the
increasing non-uniform use of PC word processors on MAC's and IBM
clones to produce important documents, memos and PET's instead of the
uniform use of scribe+plain text on the 50 Series machines.

I should also point out that not all of us have postscript printers or
postscript software+supported non-postscript printers RFC's should be
available at the archive machines in a plain-text format.

Now I know that writing an RFC with a PC word processor is a lot nicer
than using an editor on most Unix-based machines or minis.

Fortunately, PC word processors like MS-Word and WordPerfect have a
plain-text output mode.  Utilities like The Software Bridge permit
conversion of other word processor files to MS-Word or WordPerfect
readable format.  It should also be possible (if it has not already
been done) to hack up a postscript interpreter to output plaintext to
a file.

Hence, even for someone using a PC word processor, there is no
necessity to submit RFC's in postscript format.

There might be some value to maintain a postscript format RFC archive
somewhere but we should remember a great RFC will be great in
plaintext while a piece of garbage will still be a piece of garbage no
matter how beautifully a postscript printer can output it.

Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo