Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ginosko!uunet!mcsun!unido!uniol!lehners From: lehners@uniol.UUCP (Joerg Lehners) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Comment on RFC1124 (?) Message-ID: <871@uniol.UUCP> Date: 28 Sep 89 22:19:23 GMT References: <5446@asylum.SF.CA.US> <932@manta.NOSC.MIL> <1989Sep28.030658.4118@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu> Organization: University of Oldenburg, W-Germany Lines: 33 zweig@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu (Johnny Zweig) writes: >It seems the best thing to do is to put PostScript stuff _somewhere else_. I >like being able to do "lpr RFCxxx" and have the right thing happen -- and I >imagine people who don't have PostScript printers around would be even more >adamant on the point. Same with me, except I don't print the RFC often. I almost all time just do an 'more Rfc/Rfc' to look up some details. Printouts get lost too often. And what about looking up words. I would like to be able to do for example: 'grep TTL Rfc/rfc*'. >It seems that complicated drawings ought to go into some kind of companion >document that would be referenced (with good old [1]...[n] in plain ASCII) >in the RFC-proper. >I think that one can go a long way with - + | _ / \ < and >. Certainly >anything that can't be described without a comlicated drawing ought to be >rephrased. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but a standard should be >clear enough not to need thousands of words. Yes. I really like the drawings in rfc793. It's good enough and visisble on every character only terminal. For details see the Text ! What about that: Let all RFCxxxx and the new in the old style, build some RFCxxxx.ps files for the Postscript-Version. But they should NOT differ in contents ! Joerg -- / Joerg Lehners | Fachbereich 10 Informatik ARBI \ | | Universitaet Oldenburg | | BITNET/EARN: 066065@DOLUNI1.BITNET | Ammerlaender Heerstrasse 114-118 | \ UUCP/Eunet: lehners@uniol.uucp | D-2900 Oldenburg /