> Using NROFF my have cut the time RFC editor's time but it would have such a
> crippled tool would have increased our development time tremendously.
Personally, I disagree. I find richer document preparation environments
annoying and counterproductive. A simple markup language is what I want to use,
and I pretty much don't care which one it is aside from that. In the future I'm
probably going to switch from NROFF to Marshall Rose's XML document preparation
facility, but only after I write an NROFF output module for it.
However, this is all very personal and it may well be that you are more
productive in a richer environment. Nor did I suggest that you should change to
using NROFF. I simply pointed out that your your choice of editing tools has
an impact during RFC preparation, and that may be a factor in how long your
documents spend in the RFC editor queue.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 05 2001 - 12:53:17 EST