> Consider the problem of answering the question "Is the RFC on my screen
> or printer the same as your document?  Was either version edited by
> someone or something?"

> Then no matter what DTD verifiers the RFC Editor runs, we will have
> people saying "RFC 98765432 says blah de blah right here on this
> sheet of paper" because they printed it with a User Friendly XML
> printer that fixes spelling errors and deletes bits that infringe on
> Microsoft's business plans and the RIAA's intellectual property.

Vernon, if you honestly believe this to be true, then the only format you
could possibly advocate is printed hardcopy locked up in a vault.

Even ASCII documents are subject to bit rot, be it on media, during
transmission, while in memory, etc.

--lyndon

Reply via email to