Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protocols (IETF Draft)

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by leif on Thursday February 02, 2012 @01:00AM (#3541646)

Is anyone else struck by the antiquated nature of the (what is that, a roff?) format? Why, for an "internet draft" is this page not the default format: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-02.html ?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by tedunangst on Thursday February 02, 2012 @01:55AM (#3541764)

The internet predates html by quite a bit. Perhaps html is a better format today, but the internet is not the same as the web, so it's silly to assume the default web format would be the default internet format.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by leif on Thursday February 02, 2012 @07:04AM (#3542358)

I am saying exactly "html is a better format today".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by richbradshaw on Thursday February 02, 2012 @06:09AM (#3542240)

On the other hand, nowadays everyone has a html parser/rendered installed on their computer, + raw HTML is easier to read than the format they are using.

I really wish they'd stop using it!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by LukeShu on Thursday February 02, 2012 @11:27PM (#3545756)

At the top of the page is "[txt|pdf|html]", if you click the "html", your wish is granted: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-02.html

Though they do finalize to a plain .txt form, these days most of the IDs and RFCs are created in an XML format that the xml2rfc tool take and converts into the classic .txt, pdf, html, nroff, epub...

http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-02.xml

[ Parent | on HN ]