Total of 66 messages in the last 7 days.
script run at: Fri Aug 29 00:53:02 EDT 2008
Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
15.15% | 10 | 15.34% |55157 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
13.64% |9 | 14.80% |53219 | [EMAIL PROTECTED
FYI - the placing of someone on disciplinary isolation status from a working
group formally requires a notice when the posting privileges are restored.
Since the WG chair is the responsible party for that WG it would fall to
them. The failing to do so would constitute an intentional denial of ac
On the Telechat today, the IESG made a decision to proceed with this
experiment. The IETF Secretariat has been directed to update the web
site to indicate that the IETF meeting will continue until 3:15 PM on Friday.
After each meeting the IAD conducts a survey. The IAD has been asked
to inclu
--On Thursday, 28 August, 2008 15:43 +0200 Stephane Bortzmeyer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 07:23:06PM -0400,
> John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 49 lines which said:
>
>> one would still have the image problem (which is not really
>> about pictu
At 00:30 28-08-2008, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>Read, search and produce, OK. Parse, no, unless you're joking.
>
>Parsing RFCs is incredibly difficult. If you doubt it, please write a
I'm sure it is. The point was that it would be more difficult if the
text has to be extracted from a PDF.
Than
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 07:23:06PM -0400,
John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 49 lines which said:
> one would still have the image problem (which is not really about
> pictures or decoration but about being able to express flows,
> relationships, and similar diagrams in a cle
> I was never able to get the LaTeX style file to work such that I got
> perfectly-formatted output acceptable to id-nits.
> (And id-nits was quite a bit less rigorous the last time I tried this.)
Which is precisely the reason that the style file will need constant upkeep ...
Y(J)S
___
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 04:04:02PM -0700,
SM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 37 lines which said:
> Anyone can write tools without undue cost to read, parse, search and
> produce documents in that format.
Read, search and produce, OK. Parse, no, unless you're joking.
Parsing RFCs is in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is "www.my.domain.again.my.domain.com" a valid URL on INTERNET?
It's a valid relative URL, but I think that's not what you want
to know...
> I know that "http://my.domain.again.my.domain.com"; can be a
> valid INTERNET DNS address
...the other way around it make
