From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jan 14 2009 - 22:26:38 CST
Kenneth Whistler <kenw at sybase dot com> wrote:
>>> "/Compatibility Character. /
>>> A character that would not have been encoded except for
>>> compatibility and round-trip convertibility with other standards"
> Yukka Korpela responded:
>> It's a pseudo-definition.
> Which is nonsense, I'm afraid. What Asmus cited is a descriptive
> definition of the term, as used by the folks in the UTC
> (past and current) who have developed and maintain the standard.
That is indeed the glossary definition, and the first sentence of
Section 2.3. However, the second sentence of Section 2.3 immediately
goes on to add that they are "variants of characters that already have
encodings as normal characters."
So if the truncated definition as found in the glossary is the one the
folks in the UTC have been using, then the presence of the following
sentence is a bit misleading, and hopefully this will be clarified in
the 6.0 book.
-- Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 14 2009 - 22:29:58 CST