> There is a use for XML or nroff versions of I-D's (but not RFC's) that > has not been mentioned much (maybe first in your mention of "ASCII memos > can't be reformatted"). It saves lots of work to exchange editorial changes > as deltas to a mark up language version. i agree. this certainly is of value to the folks who author I-Ds. > Perhaps in other words, allow XML in ftp.isi.edu:internet-drafts but > not in ftp.isi.edu:in-notes i agree. i'm not asking that we publish RFCs in any new formats. i'm suggesting that we experiment for 9 months in the I-D area. /mtr
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Michael Richardson
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Bora Akyol
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Marshall T. Rose
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Bora Akyol
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Lyndon Nerenberg
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Bora Akyol
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Vernon Schryver
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Vernon Schryver
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Marshall T. Rose
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Marshall T. Rose
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Michael Mealling
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Lyndon Nerenberg
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Bora Akyol
- RE: HTML better for small PDAs graham . travers
- RE: HTML better for small PDAs joaquin . riverarodriguez
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs Jon Crowcroft
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs John Stracke
- Re: HTML better for small PDAs John Stracke
- RE: HTML better for small PDAs Rosen, Brian
- RE: HTML better for small PDAs graham . travers