W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2010

Re: ISSUE-101: us-ascii-ref - Straw Poll for Objections

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 20:31:58 +0300
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "Simpson, Grant Leyton" <glsimpso@indiana.edu>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100728203158367745.c11b49f9@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Maciej Stachowiak, Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:30:21 -0700:
> 
> On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:36 AM, Simpson, Grant Leyton wrote:
> 
>> I realize that it's late in the game now that a straw poll has gone 
>> out, but is it possible to have a new change proposal that charts a 
>> middle path between the ISO option and the ECMA option? Something to 
>> the effect of having the reference to the ANSI/ISO spec but 
>> providing an option to UA developers of using the ECMA spec due to 
>> its better availability (provided, of course, they are actually 
>> identical -- I have not compared them myself).
> 
> I think it's a bit late to submit new proposals.
> 
> Regarding whether the references are identical - I don't believe 
> anyone in the Working has actually looked at a real copy of the 
> ANSI/ISO spec. However, the ECMA spec claims it is also published as 
> ISO/IEC 646, which Wikipedia says is the successor to ANSI X3.4 
> (ASCII).
>
> Assuming this information is accurate, it would appear that ECMA-6 is 
> the product of joint development with ISO/IEC, and is the version of 
> the ISO spec for ASCII as published by ECMA. I'm not an expert on 
> these topics, 

Regarding the ECMA-6 versus (assumed to be unavailable online) ANSI 
X3.4: I have been informed about the existence of RFC 20, which is a 
plain text copy of ANSI X3.4:

	http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0020.txt

-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 29 July 2010 12:51:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:19 UTC