[RFC format] Experiment with Unicode in HTML/PDF

>* RFC format:   There is ongoing developing some tooling and workflow which will allow us
>    to generate versions of our internet drafts and RFCs which have HTML and
>   PDF alternatives (with Unicode)...

This is an example of an Internet draft where the PDF edition shows Unicode examples as Unicode:


-----Original Message-----
From: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org [mailto:rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org] On Behalf Of "Martin J. Dürst"
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 6:03 AM
To: Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)
Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [rfc-i] Experiment with Unicode in HTML/PDF (was: Re: RFC Format BoF)

Hello Heather, others,

This is a submission of a lightning talk in the form of an Internet Draft in three versions:

ASCII text: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-duerst-eai-mailto-03
(including http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-duerst-eai-mailto-03.txt for the total purists)

PDF: http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-duerst-eai-mailto-03.pdf

HTML: 
http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp/2012/pub/draft-duerst-eai-mailto-03.html
(hosted personally)

The PDF and HTML versions contain non-ASCII characters where appropriate. The text version uses various fallbacks as appropriate.

The parts of interest are the author's list, the examples in sections
6.4 and 6.5, the Acknowledgments, and references [RFC3987] and [RFC6530].

Unfortunately, I will not be able to actually present the lightning talk, because I'm in Japan and it will be past midnight when you have the BOF. But maybe somebody else can volunteer?


Some further background:

I choose this draft because it is not yet a WG draft, and it was therefore a bit easier to play around, i.e. without having to get WG buy-in. There are still many technical fixes that I'm planning for this draft, and for this mailing list and BOF, the technical content of the draft is of course secondary (although I'd want to stress that the change in how the technical content comes across depending on whether Unicode is used or not is the whole point of the exercise).

[In case there are technical questions or comments, please send them to the (first) author(s) or to the EAI WG mailing list (ima@ietf.org; the 'ima' isn't a typo).]

The production was handled by augmenting the XML source with additional attributes (e.g., an attribute ifullname to parallel the fullname attribute on <author>) and selective elements (<aonly> for text that goes only into the ascii version; <ionly> for text that goes only into the 'internationalized' version).

 From this common source, two separated xml files are produced by XSLT, and then the .txt and .html version are produced with xml2rf.tcl, all of which is organized by a very simple script written in Ruby. I'll happily share these once they are cleaned up a bit more.

For the conversion from HTML to PDF, I used the "Save As" option in MS Word, after heavily shrinking the left and right margins to make sure I didn't get disturbing linebreaks in the artwork.

Please note that I'm less than happy with the details of the HTML styling and the PDF formatting. I can go into details if necessary.

Regards,    Martin.


On 2012/03/15 5:08, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
> Hi all -
>
> It's almost recursive: this is a message about the format of the RFC
> Format BoF.   As mentioned in an earlier post, I want the BoF to be
> informal, with the audience providing the information.  I do not want 
> it to be so informal that we devolve in to food fights and dart gun 
> wars (we can save that for another time).  So, in order to find a 
> balance and to effectively use our hour, we will be structuring the 
> BoF as a series of lightning talks with a general introduction.
>
> Individuals who wish to present their concerns and suggestions 
> regarding images and internationalization, two problems often referred 
> to collectively as "The ASCII Problem", must contact Nevil and I by 
> Thursday, March 22.  Remote participation in the BoF is expected, so I 
> will ask for a Very Short slide deck by 09:00 March 26, Paris time, so 
> that people not in the room have time to review the slides.  There may 
> not be time for everyone to talk (depends on how many people ask to
> participate) but we will do what we can.
>
> Lightning talks are short and to the point.  Do not expect more than 5 
> minutes to make your point(s) since there will probably be 5 minutes 
> of questions and rebuttal after.  We will have a hard stop at 18:10 as 
> requested by the Secretariat.
>
> See you in Paris!
> Heather Flanagan, RSE
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2012 09:26:14 UTC