Network Working Group | H. Flanagan |
Internet-Draft | RFC Editor |
Intended status: Informational | June 30, 2015 |
Expires: January 1, 2016 |
CSS Requirements for RFCs
draft-flanagan-rfc-css-00
While individuals may choose their own Cascading Style Sheet for presenting HTML-formatted RFCs, the default offered by the RFC Editor must meet certain requirements. This draft describes those requirements and is based on the classes defined in draft-hildebrand-html-rfc.
Discussion of this draft takes place on the rfc-interest mailing list (rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org), which has its home page at https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 1, 2016.
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
The HTML format for RFCs, described in [I-D.hildebrand-html-rfc] assigns style guidance to an RFC Editor-defined Cascading Style Sheet (CSS). This CSS will be embedded in the published HTML, and may be overridden by a locally defined CSS as desired. The embedded, default CSS as included by the RFC Editor is expected to take into account accessibility needs and be built along a responsive design model.
This document describes the requirements for the default CSS used by the RFC Editor. The requirements will only be applied to HTML documents published by the RFC Editor as per [I-D.flanagan-rfc-framework].
RFCs must be adaptable to a wide variety of devices and displays, accessible to assisted readers, and printable.
The document header must be at the top of the page and include all information described in the "Style Guide" and "RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates" [RFC7322] [RFC5741]
The body of the document must conform to the following:
The CSS must include support for a printer-friendly output. The print rules should be a part of the embedded style sheet; consumers of an RFC may develop their own print-specific style sheet as desired.
This section describes the CSS classes specific to RFCs. Basic selectors are not described.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
These classes will mostly be styled as part of .artwork. Specific classes may include '.art-ascii-art' and '.art-svg'. [HF: TBD - floating or not.
Must use a mono-spaced font.
No visible changes to the text. Such images are not currently allowed in RFCs.
TBD: to allow these images to float in the text?
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
This will not result in any special action on the part of the RFC Editor CSS. Local CSS files may choose to highlight or otherwise emphasize keywords identified with this tag.
No visible changes to the text.
Make visually distinct with a box around the code components.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
A comment within an I-D; should be visually distinct.
For I-Ds only; not for RFCs.
A comment within an I-D; should be visually distinct.
For I-Ds only; not for RFCs.
A comment within an I-D; should be visually distinct.
For I-Ds only; not for RFCs.
TBD
TBD
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
Standard link formatting (underlined, change in color).
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
A note to be added after the standard boilerplage. Make visually distinct to highlight final removal of the note by the RFC Editor.
For I-Ds only; not for RFCs.
TBD
TBD
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
Pilcrows, when used as described in draft-hildebrand-html-rfc, should appear at the end of the paragraph, artwork, or sourcecode segment.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
TBD
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
Same styling as ".code"
Example: lang-c
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
No visible changes to the text.
Formatting will be required. Details TBD.
No visible changes to the text.
TBD
TBD
No visible changes to the text.
TBD
Security vulnerabilities can be introduced through the CSS. How much detail do we need to go into here to say "don't do foolish things and introduce security issues?"
This draft contains no action for IANA
[HTMLBP] | W3C, "Best Practices for Authoring HTML Current Status", n.d.. |
[RFC5741] | Daigle, L., Kolkman, O. and IAB, "RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, December 2009. |
[RFC7322] | Flanagan, H. and S. Ginoza, "RFC Style Guide", RFC 7322, September 2014. |
[I-D.hildebrand-html-rfc] | Hildebrand, J. and P. Hoffman, "HyperText Markup Language Request For Comments Format", Internet-Draft draft-hildebrand-html-rfc-07, June 2015. |
[I-D.flanagan-rfc-framework] | Flanagan, H., "RFC Format Framework", Internet-Draft draft-flanagan-rfc-framework-04, June 2015. |