5 ms·
Why do RFC's have to be so ugly?
by ubersoldat2k7 13y ago
Why do RFC's have to be so ugly?
- seliopou 13y agoI think this[1] is to blame for it. [1]: http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/ http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/
- treerex 13y agoBecause they originate from a time where plain text was what you had, and the format was created to be consistent and easy to format by hand. I still prefer my specifications to be in plain text so that I can view them easily and quickly.
- nfoz 13y agoI still prefer my everything in plaintext....
- jrochkind1 13y agoIt would be easy enough to at least format them in HTML, they use such consistent ascii 'typesetting', it could easily be automated. I mean, they are formatted in HTML now, but as a giant block of monospace text. They could use <hx>s for the headers, let the text flow with browser resize for small screens, heck use bootstrap for good readable web typesetting, etc. I am not sure why the IETF isn't interested in better web typesetting for em. At one point someone had a site that did that, I think it was advertised and discussed here on HN, but I forget what it was called, and I think it faded into non-supported obscurity (since it was obviously a labor of love, unpaid).
- twsted 13y agoI really love them. This probably reveals my age...
- icebraining 13y agoNope, I'm <25 and I love them too.
- byroot 13y agoIt's just a formating issue. Nothing prevent you to reformat them: http://pretty-rfc.herokuapp.com/RFC2616 http://pretty-rfc.herokuapp.com/RFC2616
- r00fus 13y agoThis is very cool. Why is the RFC source not available and what does it take to get it?
- byroot 13y agoThe home page states: Note: most RFCs can't be prettified at the moment, as their source files are unavailable to the public and need to be requested from rfc-editor.org. I'm working on this. I suppose that it's just a matter of time.