Re: RFC's In HTML Format

Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (dee@cybercash.com)
Mon, 15 May 95 12:40:41 EDT

Walter,

This is more complex than it would seem. RFCs are allowed in ASCII
and PostScript right now. For a while, authoritative versions of
standards tracks RFCs were allowed in PostScript but this was revoked
because of numerous problems with compatility, searchability, etc.

If there were universal enough standard for HTML on the standards
track as a (of necessity) ASCII RFC, you might be able to get the RFC
editor to agree to allow HTML at the same level as PostScript, as a
non-authoritative alternate view. To get HTML allowed as the
authoritative version of standards track RFC would be a lot more
difficult. To be sure no one was missing anyting important, the HTML
would probably have to be severly restricted to features you were sure
that essentially all browsers would have. For example, it might be
necessary to ban images, sounds, etc. because many people have text
only browsers. And you would probably still have to provide a
straight text version.

In any case, RFC editing policy is certainly not going to be set
by th html-wg.

Donald

On Sat, 13 May 1995, Walter Houser wrote:

> Date: Sat, 13 May 95 17:31:33 EDT
> From: Walter Houser <houser@cpcug.org>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
> Subject: RFC's In HTML Format
>
> HTML- WG:
>
> My apologies in advance for not lurking but I need the html-wg's advice.
> I'm principal author of an FAQ for the IETF EDI working group and have
> produced the FAQ in both ascii and html format. The conversion to html was
> a tedious process, and I do not look forward to maintaining parallel
> versions. Nor do I want to convert lovingly crafted html into prosaic text.
>
> I've suggested to the EDI WG that I propose to update/replace RFC 1111 so
> that html can join txt and ps as legitimate formats on the IETF ftp server.
> With Dave Crocker's tacit blessing, I'm raising it with html-wg.
>
> If there is agreement that this is the place to do this work, I'll work up
> the text and run it up the flagpole. This shouldn't take very long, but the
> result should make the RFC editor's life (Raggett, Connolly, mine) a lot
> easier. It will also address the issue I raised at Danvers about the lack
> of availability of draft html v3 specs on ds.internic.net. (The html could
> be ftp'd into ds.internic.net without conversion to ascii.)
>
> Thanks
> Walt Houser
>
> BTW I searched through the archive at
> http:www.acl.lanl.gov/HTML_WG/archives.html and found no references to
> "format" in previous discussions. Apologies in advance if this have been
> addressed already and point me to the appropriate thread.
>
> cc to IETF-EDI WG
>
> Walter R. Houser 301-622-4384
> Houser Systems houser@cpcug.org
> Have the Courage to Be Imperfect!
>
>

=====================================================================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 508-287-4877(tel) dee@cybercash.com
318 Acton Street +1 508-371-7148(fax) dee@world.std.com
Carlisle, MA 01741 USA +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA)