À 09:44 11-09-96 -0400, Glenn Adams a écrit :
>I believe that moving ahead with a bare "UTF-8" is an extremely
>bad idea. To stay consistent with previous tags, you should
> ISO-10646-UTF-8 (this is ambiguous regarding repertoire)
>As the author of the I-D, you can revoke it prior to it being published
>as an RFC. I would request that you do so immediately before it goes
Before I do that, I would like to see a little more argumentation, beyond
the naked statement that it is "an extremely bad idea". The consistency
argument seems pretty weak to me, in the face of a consensus for "UTF-8"
alone reached after a quite lengthy discussion on the ISO10646 list,
involving a number of knowledgeable people .
Has the UTC considered the question for more than a few minutes, or has it
simply found it expedient to follow the pattern? Has a case been made for
the need of a version number in the MIME tag(s)? Is it based on the change
to the Korean encoding? If so, does the UTC consider this incompatible
change to be a serious problem in practice?
-- François Yergeau <firstname.lastname@example.org> Alis Technologies Inc., Montréal Tél : +1 (514) 747-2547 Fax : +1 (514) 747-2561
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:31 EDT