The MPLS WG Archive

[theo <tb@rimail.com>]

Hi all,

Why don't you propose to microsoft to include a new add-on such as an
"ietf-converter" ?

theo

Rob Blais wrote:

> Would it not be hypocritical of the IETF to both create and promote
> open specifications (RFCs) while at the same time advocating or at least
> accepting a proprietary document format such as MS-Word?  As one who
> has wasted far too much time on the blue screen of death and finally
> made the switch back to Unix, I would very much be opposed to any
> attempts to change the current open and portable document distribution
> practices.  The IETF has reached almost Zen-like perfection in management
> of documents.  I wish all standards organizations were this good!  It is
> the epitomy of the KISS principle in action.
>
> If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  It sure doesn't look broken to me.
> I vote in favor of keeping the status quo.
>
> /rob
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rob Blais                  rdb@iol.unh.edu          "The Internet?
> MPLS Consortium Manager    Phone: 603-862-4569       Is that thing
> ATM Operations Manager     Fax:   603-862-4181       still around?"
> UNH InterOperability Lab   http://www.iol.unh.edu/   -Homer Simpson
>
> > I find it kind of weird that the vast majority (read as 'overwhelming
> > consensus and far from rough running code') use Word/ppt and yet we are
> > forced to use this outdated mode for producing IDs.  This is just dogma to
> > me and I don't buy any of the arguments I have heard to retain this mode.
> > If IETF claim to act on a consenus basis then why not lets have a vote on
> > this?
> >
> > neil
> >