[rfc-i] Re: Normative ABNF [was Re: Re: Normative information in RFC imagery]

On 14. May 2025, at 17:41, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rivest-sexp/ is a good example of a > language whose ABNF cannot be normative (that's because the s-exp variant > described in it is non-context free). I think you are saying that the ABNF doesn’t

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

On Fri, May 16, 2025, at 13:10, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> Not all diagrams benefit from scaling them up indefinitely. >> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9100#figure-1 > > There are always exceptions. I think this is something that should be > decided case by case, but as I mentioned most d

[rfc-i] Re: Specification vs implementation [was Re: Re: Normative information in RFC imagery]

On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 06:03:01PM -0700, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > A specification is always declarative. Code and algorithms are always > prescriptive, and are actually examples of implementation of a > specification. That means that there are many programs and many > algorithms that would b

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

On 16-May-25 14:56, Carsten Bormann wrote: On 16. May 2025, at 04:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Simply remove the width and height elements, but leave the viewbox as is, and the diagram will scale when you resize the browser window (up to screen width, and down to a minimum). Not all diagr

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

On 16. May 2025, at 04:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > Simply remove the width and height elements, but leave the viewbox as is, and > the diagram will scale when you resize the browser window (up to screen > width, and down to a minimum). Not all diagrams benefit from scaling them up indefi

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

Mike, On 16-May-25 10:36, StJohns, Michael wrote: AFAICT, the scaling of the SVG is based on the rendered width of the page.  And that appears fixed even when you yank your browser wide. That depends. Most SVG drawing software inserts something like this in the element: width="180mm" hei

[rfc-i] Specification vs implementation [was Re: Re: Normative information in RFC imagery]

On 5/15/25 9:31 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 04:43:33PM -0700, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: >> No to making anything but English sentences normative. People can add >> all the examples, diagram, images, and alt tags they want in an RFC, I >> am going to ignore all of them and c

[rfc-i] Re: Normative elements in RFCXML

On 5/15/25 8:00 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > On 5/15/25 9:21 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > ... >> 2. for each document in the set, strip all the non-normative parts. >> 3. print all the modified documents in TEXT format. > ... >> But step 2 is unfortunately not as simple, as deciding which parts ar

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

AFAICT, the scaling of the SVG is based on the rendered width of the page. And that appears fixed even when you yank your browser wide. Acrobat generally gives you a lot of options on how to fit your page to a screen. I don’t know enough about HTML and style sheets to know whether something like t

[rfc-i] Re: RFC Production Center open meeting

Hi all, This is a reminder that the RPC is hosting a meeting next week. Hope to see you there! Jean On 4/30/25 4:31 PM, Jean Mahoney wrote: Hi all, The RPC will be hosting an open meeting on May 21 at 19:00 UTC. This is our first such meeting, and we will share updates from our retreat tha

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

On Fri, May 16, 2025, at 07:39, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> /doc/html/... >> >> has an _option_ you control with settings to either show you the >> htmlized text, or, if the v3 html is available, show you _that_ with a >> different style sheet that makes it look (mostly) like the htmlized >> text.

[rfc-i] Re: checking SVGs (was Re: Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable)

On Fri, May 16, 2025, at 01:09, Jean Mahoney wrote: >> Probably because it wasn't fully cleaned up during editing. Some authoring >> tools include RDF-based metadata in the SVG files. Others use private >> namespaces for that. It is harmless, though would not also make the mistake >> of calli

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

On 16-May-25 09:00, Robert Sparks wrote: Minor detail to keep in mind called out inline. On 5/15/25 3:35 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Nico, On 16-May-25 04:07, Nico Williams wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:50:13AM +1000, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 11:44, StJohns, Michael

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 08:35:09AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > Ah, that works. On the HTML at the datatracker[0] that figure is > > unreadable, > > I assume you mean the one that the tracker quaintly calls "htmlized"? Yes, but that's not really the critical thing for me (though I do actu

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

Minor detail to keep in mind called out inline. On 5/15/25 3:35 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Nico, On 16-May-25 04:07, Nico Williams wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:50:13AM +1000, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 11:44, StJohns, Michael wrote: Just took a look from an iPadMini

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

Nico, On 16-May-25 04:07, Nico Williams wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:50:13AM +1000, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 11:44, StJohns, Michael wrote: Just took a look from an iPadMiniusing Safari. Perfectly readable. And I’m myopic. But they are a bit dense. All screens are

[rfc-i] Re: Normative information in RFC imagery

On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 01:38:59PM -0400, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > On 5/15/25 12:31 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > > (Also, I'm a big fan of using _APIs_ to help specify _protocols_ > > including _semantics_, but that is not a popular view at the IETF, > > sadly.) > > An API in the general case (e.g., in

[rfc-i] Re: Normative information in RFC imagery

On 5/15/25 12:31 PM, Nico Williams wrote: (Also, I'm a big fan of using _APIs_ to help specify _protocols_ including _semantics_, but that is not a popular view at the IETF, sadly.) An API in the general case (e.g., interface declarations for some programming language) does not define an inte

[rfc-i] Re: Normative information in RFC imagery

On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 04:43:33PM -0700, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > No to making anything but English sentences normative. People can add > all the examples, diagram, images, and alt tags they want in an RFC, I > am going to ignore all of them and complain loudly that the protocol > cannot be i

[rfc-i] Re: Normative information in RFC imagery

On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 01:58:53AM +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote: > I have no problem at all with the “trying” part; we certainly should > do this, and I’m trying to do my part (e.g., with CDDL; I’ve also been > arguing for including source forms of images in RFCs). > > I do have a problem with “ma

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable (was: Normative information in RFC imagery)

On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:50:13AM +1000, Martin Thomson wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 11:44, StJohns, Michael wrote: > > Just took a look from an iPadMiniusing Safari. Perfectly readable. > > And I’m myopic. But they are a bit dense. > > All screens are different. I have a very large s

[rfc-i] checking SVGs (was Re: Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable)

Hi Martin, On 5/14/25 11:28 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 14:21, Carsten Bormann wrote: Refused to apply style from 'https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc-local.css' because its MIME type ('text/html') is not a supported stylesheet MIME type, and strict MIME checking is enable

[rfc-i] Re: swagger APIs

Hi Michael, > On May 15, 2025, at 6:08 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > > Thank you for the RFC8743 reference. > I see that the definitions are in an appendix, which I guess is normative. > > Rich said that we should be calling it OpenAPI, because Swagger is the > toolchain, not the format,

[rfc-i] Re: Normative elements in RFCXML

On 5/15/25 9:21 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: ... 2. for each document in the set, strip all the non-normative parts. 3. print all the modified documents in TEXT format. ... But step 2 is unfortunately not as simple, as deciding which parts are normative and which are just informative have to

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

Hi Carsten, I'll follow up with you offlist to figure out what's going on here. Thanks! Jean On 5/14/25 11:21 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: And I’m myopic. That always helps with immersing in dense diagrams :-) Should I be seeing these errors: Refused to apply style from 'https://www.rfc-ed

[rfc-i] Re: swagger APIs

Hi Michael, On 5/15/25 5:08 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: Thank you for the RFC8743 reference. I see that the definitions are in an appendix, which I guess is normative. Rich said that we should be calling it OpenAPI, because Swagger is the toolchain, not the format, yet this document says:

[rfc-i] Re: RFC 9633 SVG is unreadable

Hi all, The RPC will be working on guidelines for imagery accessibility with the community. For this doc, the RPC asked the authors to make updates to the SVG to fix spacing and terminology inconsistencies as we don't have the ability to edit diagrams like this. Because a reader could zoom i

[rfc-i] Normative elements in RFCXML

Hi, Here's an algorithm to prepare for a clean room implementation of a standard track RFC: 1. Prepare a set of documents as the RFC to implement and the transitive closure of all the normative references in that RFC. 2. for each document in the set, strip all the non-normative parts. 3. print

[rfc-i] Re: swagger APIs

Eliot Lear wrote: > Not an RFC yet, but see draft-ietf-scim-device-model.  While it's not super > obvious, the reference should probably be > https://spec.openapis.org/oas/v3.1.1.html. and you used YAML rather than JSON representation. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Wo

[rfc-i] Re: Normative information in RFC imagery

mcr> We needed an abstract that was higher level than the markdown tables. cabo> I often generate tables from CSV files. I'm not sure that would have helped us. But, yeah, maybe we should have written some scripts to create the tables. Alexis Rossi wrote: > An HTML table is general

[rfc-i] Re: swagger APIs

Thank you for the RFC8743 reference. I see that the definitions are in an appendix, which I guess is normative. Rich said that we should be calling it OpenAPI, because Swagger is the toolchain, not the format, yet this document says: The documentation of APIs is provided in the OpenAPI format

[rfc-i] Re: swagger APIs

Carsten Bormann wrote: > On 14. May 2025, at 16:23, Paul Duffy (paduffy) wrote: >> >> It was required that both the OpenAPI and Protobuf definitions be inlined within the draft. It's a mess (not directly usable by developer tools … > That is indeed a problem. > I made a q

[rfc-i] Re: rfc-interest Digest, Vol 247, Issue 12

Riley, I've seen you some time ago I'm a 27 years old sexy chick longing for a sexy friend. I am ready to try anything in the bedroom ;) are you interested? Please, lets meet today or tomorrow In case you want to see my dirty selfies, you can enjoy them: JessicaSmith pics