RE: IPS: FCIP & this list

[Robert Snively <rsnively@Brocade.COM>]

David,

That is perfect.  Ralph already provides both the text and
pdf versions of the standards path documents.  Shall he 
just send both up together next time?  For non-standards
path documents or for informational RFCs, would we be
able to use pdf alone?  The pdf format seems to be particularly
handy for tutorial diagrams which may be found in such 
documents.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Black_David@emc.com [mailto:Black_David@emc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 3:15 PM
> To: rsnively@brocade.com; ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: RE: IPS: FCIP & this list
> 
> 
> Bob,
> 
> You left out the piece of Ralph's email which said
> that converting the intermediate PDFs to text was not
> feasible, hence only a PDF version will be available:
> 
> > The interim FCIP drafts and issues lists are maintained in PDF
> > format, amounting to between .2M and .5M of new material per 
> > week. Since this is Rome, they cannot be posted to this reflector.
> > It is totally impractical to translate the PDFs to text, sorry.
> 
> Submitting paired text and PDF documents to the I-D servers
> is fine, but keep in mind that the text version must be
> self-contained by the time it is last called in the WG (i.e.,
> only figures that are not crucial to understanding the
> document can be omitted from the text version).
> 
> > I would like to push the IETF to step up to their stated
> > flexibility in this area, if they have not already done so.
> 
> If you want those intermediate PDF versions on the I-D servers,
> you need to push Ralph to generate their text counterparts.
> The IETF secretariat stands ready to do what was promised.
> 
> Thanks,
> --David
> ---------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Senior Technologist
> EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 435-1000 x75140     FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
> black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Snively [mailto:rsnively@Brocade.COM]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:36 PM
> > To: Black_David@emc.com; ENDL_TX@computer.org; ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > Subject: RE: IPS: FCIP & this list
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Dave,
> > 
> > At the open-mic session at the last IETF meeting, I specifically 
> > raised the issue of pdf as a documentation capability.  If I
> > interpreted the reply correctly, the primary document must
> > be text only.  However, versions of the documents in pdf format
> > were explicitly allowed in order to bring graphics and
> > better text formatting to the task of making the document
> > clearer.
> > 
> > >From that, I would have expected that, as long as you provided
> > paired txt and pdf documents, that they should both be
> > available on the IETF web-sites and registered through the
> > I-D servers.  In the case of personal drafts, it would be
> > even possible that only the pdf existed, since they would be
> > notes and supplemental texts to the txt formal drafts.
> > 
> > I would like to push the IETF to step up to their stated
> > flexibility in this area, if they have not already done so.
> > 
> > Bob
> > 
> > > That's a judgment call.  Actually sending the PDFs to the list
> > > or the I-D servers is a no-no, but it would be ok to put them
> > > on a web site and post URLs to the list, as long as new text
> > > versions of the draft do go to the I-D servers at reasonable
> > > intervals.  It would also be ok to keep the interim PDF versions
> > > private among the authors until the next major revision of
> > > the draft is ready for the I-D servers.  There's
> > > no requirement to make all working notes visible.
> > 
>