- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 15:15:58 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15142 --- Comment #3 from Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> 2011-12-11 15:15:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > this proposal should be rejected for a variety of reasons: > > I agree with this conclusion, but... > > > (2) the Unicode Consortium is the appropriate forum for considering the > > possible registration of any new character encoding based upon the Unicode > > Character Set; [1] > > ...then how come UTF-8 is defined in an IETF specification? > > Best regards, Julian a historical circumstance... in the 1992-93 time frame, ISO SC2/WG2 first proposed UTF-1 as a transformation encoding of ISO/IEC 10646 UCS-4; although UTF-1 never caught on, the more efficient alternative, UTF-8, came out of work started at X/Open and concluded at Bell Labs in Plan 9; later, the Unicode Standard incorporated the normative definition of UTF-8 into The Unicode Standard; the current IETF RFC 3629 (STD 63) [1] refers to the Unicode Standard for the formal definition of UTF-8: 3. UTF-8 definition UTF-8 is defined by the Unicode Standard [UNICODE]. Descriptions and formulae can also be found in Annex D of ISO/IEC 10646-1 [ISO.10646] [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3629#section-3 glenn -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 11 December 2011 15:18:01 UTC