Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!RT-JQJ.STANFORD.EDU!jqj From: jqj@RT-JQJ.STANFORD.EDU (JQ Johnson) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Comment on RFC1124 (?) Message-ID: <8909281348.AA03122@rt-jqj> Date: 28 Sep 89 13:48:31 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 21 A printer language such as Postscript isn't really ideal for the "canonical" versions of RFCs, though it does allow arbitrary graphics. It suffers from not allowing other forms of access, particularly online display on character only terminals and use with typical character-only text processing tools like grep. It doesn't generalize well to hypertext either. If standards were a bit further advanced, the ideal choice for RFCs would be a standard markup language (GML? RTF? InterScript? WordPerfect internal format? troff input?). Then we could generate whatever display format we wanted for it. They aren't to that point yet, I'm afraid. What are the NSF Expres project's solutions? If NSF is willing to accept something as a grant proposal format, then I'd be willing to accept it for an RFC. JQ Johnson voice: 415-723-3078 Manager, Special Projects Internet: jqj@jessica.stanford.edu Networking and Communications Systems Pine Hall Rm 125-A Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-4122