W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-charsets@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: Fwd: Registration of 6 charsets

From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 13:30:51 +0859
To: ned.freed@innosoft.com
Cc: ned.freed@innosoft.com, "Martin J. Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>, Harald Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>, ietf-charsets@innosoft.com
Message-id: <200004050431.NAA15355@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>

> > Some unregistered charset names may be not usable as a MIME charset
> > parameter value.
> What you call some random charset outside of a protocol has nothing to do 
> with the registration process.

Agreed completely.


If you are just stating your opinion, it's fine.

But, if you are trying to argue against me, please make my point
you are arguing against clear.

There can be a charset not suitable for MIME use, even though the
content of the charset follows the rules required for MIME text.

> > > Martin is completely correct here. See RFC 2278 section 3.1. It says that all
> > > charset registrations must note whether or not they are suitable for use in
> > > MIME text, based on what the MIME specification (RFC 2045) says about text.
> > Wrong. RFC 2278 requires:
> My dear sir, I wrote this part of the specification, so I think I know what it
> means.

It is of course that editors think they know what their work means.

But, it does not mean editors define what their work means.

A sad reality is that, once editors make a mistake, they are the last
people to recognize the mistake.

> You can argue that the words aren't clear if you like

The words including context are chrystal clear.

> And I'm not the editor, I'm the author.

It seems to me that you are claiming that you, as an author,
communicated with others less often than editors are expected
to do.

However, as is described in section 5.2 of RFC 1603 and section 2.3 of
RFC 2028, WG documents are maintained by WG editors that you should
have acted as an editor. WG editors on a document can be replaced.

Or, are you saying that your personal ID has passed IESG review as is
without WG review? Then, you are the author. But I have never noticed
that it occurred.

Anyway, please read the rules carefully and never try to create your own.

If you think you need further clarifications on IETF standardization
process, please mail me privately or make it in generic ietf mailing

							Masataka Ohta
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2000 00:35:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:52:17 UTC