RFCs should be distributed in XML (Was: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 09:24:51AM -0800, Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 36 lines which said: The problems with HTML are almost entirely the result of people trying to give the author control over the final format which is none of the author's beeswax. BTW, does anyone who knows IETF and the RFC-editor function better than I do, can tell why RFC 2629 is not the mandatory official format for RFC, even now after six years? ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Open standards for pictures (Was: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:06:23AM +0100, Anthony G. Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 15 lines which said: when you get into graphics it's hard to insist on text only. I agree, SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics, http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/) should be the standard for RFC. True, it is not an IETF standard but it is open (for whatever definition of open you choose). An alternative is the Graphviz dot language (http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/graphviz/) which is certainly much simpler to edit by hand but is not completely open (it is a proprietary format, although its use is free and there is a free software implementation). ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 06:45:27PM +0100, Anthony G. Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 24 lines which said: It has been the author's prerogative for thousands of years; Certainly not, unless the author is also the typographer, which is uncommon. The author is the creator of the content, not the reader. The content, not the presentation. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 09:24:51AM -0800, Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 36 lines which said: If you try to print out RFCs in Europe I print RFC all the time (I'm an old dino, used to paper), I live in France which seems to be in Europe and It Works For Me. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
At 10:24 08/11/2005, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 06:45:27PM +0100, Anthony G. Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 24 lines which said: It has been the author's prerogative for thousands of years; Certainly not, unless the author is also the typographer, which is uncommon. The author is the creator of the content, not the reader. The content, not the presentation. Stephane, you refer yourself only to a short period of 500 years, mostly in Western Europe. The computer assisted writing, restores that right. The architext container restores and extend many possibilities in that area. Typography is a part of the presentation. Even in the French early XXth century poestry this was the case (cf. Apollinaire). jfc ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:41:13AM +0100, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 21 lines which said: Typography is a part of the presentation. Nobody would object here :-) Even in the French early XXth century poestry this was the case (cf. Apollinaire). Not everyone is Apollinaire. That's why we need typographs (I fully agree with Phillip Hallam-Baker here: presentation is important, and that's why it should be left to professionnals). If everyone were Voltaire, we would not need smileys to express irony. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: RFCs should be distributed in XML (Was: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Nov 8, 2005, at 4:26 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: BTW, does anyone who knows IETF and the RFC-editor function better than I do, can tell why RFC 2629 is not the mandatory official format for RFC, even now after six years? My guess is that it is not a trivial matter to convert RFCs submitted in other forms into 2629 xml format. And though I prefer to use xml2rfc, there are many people desiring some of the word processor features (track changes, etc...) that are just not found in the xml authoring tools. -andy ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: RFCs should be distributed in XML (Was: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 08:36:55AM -0500, Andrew Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 14 lines which said: My guess You mean there is nowhere an official statement and we have to guess? is that it is not a trivial matter to convert RFCs submitted in other forms into 2629 xml format. OK for the existing stuff but why not for the future, such as Starting 1 Jan 2007, every RFC submission must be done in 2629? there are many people desiring some of the word processor features (track changes, etc...) that are just not found in the xml authoring tools. Well, you certainly know that XML is a format, not a program :-) So, at least in theory, you could use OpenOffice and still producing 2629 (providing someone wrote a XSL transformation from OpenDocument to 2629). Not obvious, I know, but a possible path. For the specific feature you mention, I use version control system with XML, I do not see the problem. Tools like Subversion even allow you to specify an external diff so you can use a XML-aware diff to see the changes. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Stepping down
I will be stepping down from the AD job in March, that is, not re-upping as the nomcom does its work now for TSV and RAI. Doing this service for the IETF has been a blast but after a number of years, it's enough service. More importantly, I believe strongly that the IETF should always grow new people into leaders, let new views and talents come forward. The formation of the RAI area means that TSV and RAI have reasonable numbers of working groups, should be easier to tackle for an AD manager than TSV has been. This was on purpose. AD work is deeply rewarding service. I recommend it. Nuff said. Allison ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
Actually quite a lot of people disagree. And this would HARDLY be considered a MS friendly venue, though clearly as someone mentioned you've got a gripe with Microsoft and not proprietary standards otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned PDF. On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 18:59:10 +0100, Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Brian Here's the text. You can pick up a map at the Brian concierge desk in the Westin. I ate at Wild Brian Garlic last night and it was excellent. Mr. Carpenter, the IETF Chair; Your restaurant recommendations, I do take seriously. The goers go, the talkers talk and the doers do. Remember! Of course many now visit the ietf.org site primarily for the restaurant guide. And now that is only available as a .ppt file. MANY? Without any quantification that may be true, but so what? 200 people looked for a restaurant and printed that document? Do you think people not at the conference are sitting around wondering where to eat in Vancouver, and have been left by the wayside because they went to the IETF site for DINING ADVICE and are now forever dissuaded from contributing? And of course, there also happens to be a free viewer(JUST LIKE ACROBAT), can be opened by the FREE AND OPEN OO.org app and these files can be opend by any microsoft app just about Is big business now so entrenched at the ietf that use of Microsoft's PowerPoint is being encouraged at the ietf.org website? Where is it encouraged? Who encouraged it? What official document has ever been put out in this format? True to form, like an experienced cult leader, you have again trivialized a real problem. Typically I believe comments like this indicate an evangelist at work. When you essentially insult someone when they disagree with you, you've clearly indicated that solving a problem is not your goal, creating it is. My email was not about restaurants or a need for the text. So then you're saying that document was just an excuse to harp on something you wanted to complain about anyway right? Say out of those 200 people who downloaded the map, 10 were unable to read it because they don't have access to any windows office programs, open office, or anything else for some reason. How does that compare to sending an email to 10,000 people? Personally I think you've used up much more of peoples valuable time then that document ever could. How do you feel about that? Publication of anything in Microsoft PowerPoint format at the ietf.org website is utterly inappropriate and wrong. If IETF's Best Current Practices are to be taken seriously, ietf.org website should lead by example. A responsible IETF Chair would have: - Recognized and acknowledged that publication of anything at the ietf.org web site in Microsoft's PowerPoint format is wrong. According to you? It appears you've convinced nobody (or very few) of your incongrous goals, yet are happy to pass judgement on a very hard working member of the community. - Immediately addressed the problem and republished in an Open/Libre/Free format. Several people did that, but clearly that's not what you were looking for. - Addressed the broader question of what are the Open/Libre/Free formats appropriate for web publication and what constitutes an Open/Libre/Free format. What does that have to do with the IETF? Did you make any effort to see if issues like this have been addressed before burdening the list? In between good meals, perhaps you can also consider your responsibilities. In what way is this document an official IETF document? Did it get approved by consensus or running code? Does it have an RFC number? Or is it possible someone was just trying to help people who were hungry out? I'm a pragmatist, mostly I'm aware of what's going on and I try to handle it as best as I can. You didn't try to help anyone with a solution, or even a recommendation that conforms to your stated goals, and seemed happily able to waste a lot of peolple's time. repeated for emphasis My email was not about restaurants or a need for the text. /repeated I admit it. Stuff like that pisses me off. Not long ago somebody said in an email that they didn't read some documents, nor care to, but felt quite able to comment on the process, and it did the same thing. Luckly this isn't a forum where someone like you can just YELL LOUDER THAN EVERYONE ELSE to try to affect people's opinions like people did in high school. As far as I'm concerend the only thing you can claim credit for is causing 500,000 emails or so to circulate without solving any problem at all. And it's not like everyone doesn't send something not well thought out from time to time, but you responded: more repetition for emphasis True to form, like an experienced cult leader, you have again trivialized a real problem. /more repetition By insulting the current leader as well as the group. Care to comment on
Notes from remote
Many, many thanks to the Jabber scribes - there've been some excellent note-takers and it's made it possible to follow along well from home. The audio has also been excellent, although it would be a help if more attention were paid to making sure that folks with mobile mikes (that is to say, the speakers) were getting picked up, too. Otherwise it's been quite good. Melinda ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony G. Atkielski Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes: A bad one, empower the reader. Why are readers more important than authors? Because they are your customers. The point of communication is to get your point across to the READER. For that, you need control over how the information is presented. No, the author can not possibly know the needs of the reader. If you want to dictate the presentation to them then you are making a big mistake. If that were true, then all teachers would teach in exactly the same style, since doing otherwise would be dictating the presentation. No, good teachers adapt their style based on the feedback they get from their audience. There is no such thing. As the RFC corpus demonstrates people want headers, footers, page numbers. All of these can be in plain text. Once you add the headers and footers you no longer have plain text, you have ASCII text in a device dependent markup. If you are generating PDF, you're expected to know something about electronic publishing, and that includes the use of fonts. In Acrobat Distiller, embedding fonts is a simple menu option. Enough people get it wrong to cause me problems reading their documents. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Open standards for pictures (Was: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
Stephane Bortzmeyer writes: I agree, SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics, http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/) should be the standard for RFC. True, it is not an IETF standard but it is open (for whatever definition of open you choose). Neither PostScript nor PDF is secret. And you can write software to process PDF without paying any royalties; I think the same is true for PostScript. This is vastly preferable to reinventing the wheel. An alternative is the Graphviz dot language (http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/graphviz/) which is certainly much simpler to edit by hand but is not completely open (it is a proprietary format, although its use is free and there is a free software implementation). Why is this better than PostScript and PDF? ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes: Because they are your customers. The reader/author relationship is only very rarely comparable to the customer/vendor relationship. For many authors, money is not that important. No, the author can not possibly know the needs of the reader. The reader can pick what he needs and ignore what he doesn't. That's not the author's job. Once you add the headers and footers you no longer have plain text, you have ASCII text in a device dependent markup. Upon what device does it depend? Enough people get it wrong to cause me problems reading their documents. They don't know what they're doing. Blame the workman, not the tools. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: RFCs should be distributed in XML (Was: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:25 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: You mean there is nowhere an official statement and we have to guess? Not that I know of, but I could be wrong. there are many people desiring some of the word processor features (track changes, etc...) that are just not found in the xml authoring tools. Well, you certainly know that XML is a format, not a program :-) So, at least in theory, you could use OpenOffice and still producing 2629 (providing someone wrote a XSL transformation from OpenDocument to 2629). Not obvious, I know, but a possible path. That is certainly a possibility. And a good idea. For the specific feature you mention, I use version control system with XML, I do not see the problem. Tools like Subversion even allow you to specify an external diff so you can use a XML-aware diff to see the changes. I too use Subversion and rfcdiff and xml2rfc. But there are people doing work (i.e. writing docs) in the IETF that do not work this way. They may find using a version control system to be time-wise expensive or prohibitive, especially compared to emailing track- change-docs back and forth. -andy ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony G. Atkielski Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes: Because they are your customers. The reader/author relationship is only very rarely comparable to the customer/vendor relationship. For many authors, money is not that important. A 240 page trade book costs $20 on Amazon and takes me approximately 8 hours to read. That's $2.50 an hour The investiment in time that I make is vastly more than the purchase price of the book. I do not write to make money first and foremost, I write to communicate an idea. To be successful it is best to appreciate the time investment that the reader is making. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
What you should wear to tonight's IETF64 Social
Title: What you should wear to tonight's IETF64 Social -- Posted on behalf of Denise Dziubaniuk -- All, The IETF Social event is now sold out. Thanks to everyone for your interest. For those of you with tickets, you can enjoy most of the Aquarium sights from inside. However, some of the sights are best viewed from the outside. You should dress for the weather and wear your coat. We have made arrangements for tents to be set up in the main areas to keep people dry. There is a short (less than one minute) walk from the bus to the entrance that will not be covered. However, if you don't want the weather to limit your Aquarium experience, you may wish to bring an umbrella! Shuttle buses will depart the Westin Bayshore Hotel, starting at 7pm. Buses will run continuously throughout the evening between the Bayshore and the Aquarium. The last bus will depart the Aquarium at 11:15pm. Return buses will stop at the Marriott Pinnacle, approximately every half hour, starting at 9pm. Please look for the buses with Marriott sign. Be sure to wear your name badge with your Beluga sticker attached. The Beluga sticker is required to get on the bus and enter the Aquarium. Don't forget your drink tickets!! Enjoy your evening! See you there, Denise [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: RFCs should be distributed in XML
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: [your premise snipped ;-] tell why RFC 2629 is not the mandatory official format for RFC, even now after six years? It's an excellent tool to create real drafts and RfCs. For real read text/plain us-ascii in the format defined elsewhere (2223bis among others). It's not the only available tool. Bruce is the maintainer of the nroff tools, and somebody else offers MS word tools. The tools team apparently adopted RfC 2629 as the primary format for the automatical handling of submissions, and one of the document set drafts also builds on this format. Just let it be, eventually it will be as you want it. Numerous tools like rfcmarkup still build on the real format, and nothing's wrong with that. With xml2rfc you can now also create unpaginated output, nice for creating / posting a quick diff. That feature was added this year, it's still a living project, last DTD updates also this year. The EULA boilerplates (= 78/79) are also still a moving target (unfortunately). This is all not yet ready to be cast in stone. Only the general direction is IMHO more or less clear. Bye, Frank ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
jabber rooms
I don't think I've seen a reminder this week that jabber room for the XXX WG or BOF is [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: jabber rooms
Brian E Carpenter wrote: I don't think I've seen a reminder this week that jabber room for the XXX WG or BOF is [EMAIL PROTECTED] FYI: Audio feed info: http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ Jabber info: http://www.xmpp.org/ietf-chat.html Meeting slides: https://onsite.ietf.org/public/meeting_materials.cgi?meeting_num=64 Andy ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Last Call: 'Bootstrapping TESLA' to Proposed Standard
The IESG has received a request from the Multicast Security WG to consider the following document: - 'Bootstrapping TESLA ' draft-ietf-msec-bootstrapping-tesla-02.txt as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2005-11-22. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-msec-bootstrapping-tesla-02.txt ___ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
Last Call: 'ECC Cipher Suites for TLS' to Informational RFC
The IESG has received a request from the Transport Layer Security WG to consider the following document: - 'ECC Cipher Suites for TLS ' draft-ietf-tls-ecc-12.txt as an Informational RFC The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2005-11-22. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tls-ecc-12.txt ___ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
