Re: New to Unicode

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer (
Date: Tue Jul 25 2006 - 02:24:35 CDT

  • Next message: Stephane Bortzmeyer: "Re: New to Unicode"

    On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 03:27:17AM +0200,
     Philippe Verdy <> wrote
     a message of 20 lines which said:

    > Adraft is not approved as long as it is a draft; the draft is still
    > a request for comments, meaning that corrections (including
    > additions and deletions) are still possible.

    Sorry, but you are completely wrong. But you have a good reason for
    that: IETF, like the Unicode consortium or the ISO or any human
    creation has its own set of idiosyncrasies and outsiders do not know

    So, the document is formally a draft (since the RFC was not issued)
    but it can no longer be modified inside IETF: it has been approved by
    the IESG as is
    ( The
    RFC editor (which is not related with the IETF) can still make changes
    (typically only editorial changes).

    > but I think that the approval by IETF is not enough, and that a long
    > period of external review, plus possibly other supports is needed
    > (by the IESG or CIE and some other standard bodies like the IEEE,
    > and possibly some quorum of national standard bodies like ANSI, AFOR
    > or DIN, or a selection of large Internet software vendors or
    > consortiums?)

    Not at all. The IESG already approved it. And of course other bodies
    cannot approve or deny IETF standards, like the IETF is not asked to
    approve or deny ISO standards (there are liaisons but before the
    document is approved; there is no veto power from other bodies).

    > What is worse, is that the status of the draft is now "expired"

    No, Internet-drafts expire when they are in the discussion state, but
    never when they are in the RFC editor queue. See RFC 2026 and
    for details.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jul 25 2006 - 02:27:54 CDT