- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 13:03:43 +0000
- To: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
- cc: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Gabriel Montenegro <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Osama Mazahir <OSAMAM@microsoft.com>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Matthew Cox <macox@microsoft.com>
In message <CACuKZqHURBgeCXPx1+o=c9bw-L1xA2Tum1M+TsU6X6OKVXz7MA@mail.gmail.com> , Zhong Yu writes: >An UTF-16 option would be nice. Let's be honest, UTF-8 is >English-centric. It may be necessary to interoprate with previous >ASCII based systems. But going forward, UTF-8 should not be favored >just because it is the best option for the English language. You're kidding, right ? You want to make all HTTP software much more complex and prone to software bugs and exploitation, just because you think UTF-8 is "english-centric" ? Really ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Friday, 17 January 2014 13:04:09 UTC