On 2026-01-28, at 06:50, Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026, at 16:27, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> I think RFC 9438 shows nicely how this can be done. >> >> [1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9438.txt > > I mostly agree, but Figure 9 offends my sensibilities.
Sure. Figure 9 is not “wrong”, it just is ambiguous in the plaintext rendering, but the text around it resolves that ambiguity. > There are limits to what these tools can do. Right, and the authors ran into a limitation of the tool used. They could have (1) fixed the tool so it doesn’t produce the ambiguity (2) used a (at the time non-existent) facility to tweak its output (3) live with a limitation in the plaintext rendering They chose 3, which has my sympathy (I’d just have added a note). > Some supervision and judgement seems to be a constant need. At the time, the RPC did not manage math rendering; this was (and still is) entirely up to the authors. The proposal is changing that, and that will spawn some conversations between RPC and authors. I would like to preserve all three choices! > (FWIW, I suggested fixes to this specific one, but the authors weren't > interested.) Choice 3. Grüße, Carsten -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
