> Thanks for your feedback. I will resubmit them. > Comments: > A. If each charset needs to be in a separate message, then you really ought > to fix http://www.normos.org/ietf/bcp/bcp19.txt. It says: > "5. Charset Registration Template > To: ietf-charsets@iana.org > Subject: Registration of new charset [names]" > with the word "names" in plural. This is misleading. The rest of the regisration form clearly talks about a single charset with multiple names, so I'm not sure I buy your reasoning here. However, since we want to discourage the use of any aliases, I have no problem with changing it to "name" singular. > B. UTF-32 in Unicode, as with UTF-16, could be BOM-less, with the > orientation being determined by a higher-level protocol. The IETF > registration (with good reason!) can impose a further restriction, as it > does with UTF-16, that BOM-less UTF-16 must be BE. I will put such a clause > in the registration. Which means the UTC has apparently learned nothing from the UTF-16 disaster. If we push back on this is there any hope of getting this botch fixed? NedReceived on Friday, 11 May 2001 12:22:46 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 5 June 2006 15:10:51 GMT