Re: Your comment on the Character Model [024]

I am satisfied with the responses to my personal comments (C023, C024), and 
have indicated to RDF Core that the group comments (C029, C030, C031) have 
been closed.

Jeremy


Richard Ishida wrote:

> Dear Jeremy,
> 
> Many thanks for your comments on the 2nd Last Call version of the Character
> Model for the World Wide Web v1.0 [1].  We appreciate the interest you have
> taken in this specification.
> 
> You can see the comments you submitted on your own account, grouped
> together, at 
> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/SortByOriginator.html#
> C023
> (You can jump to a specific comment in the table by adding its ID to the end
> of the URI.)
> 
> PLEASE REVIEW the decision for the following comment and reply to us within
> the next two weeks at mailto:www-i18n-comments@w3.org (copying
> w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org) to say whether you are satisfied with the decision
> taken. 
>         C024
> 
> Information relating to this comment is included below. Note that we will
> reply to other comments you sent on behalf of the RDF Core WG at a later
> date.
> 
> You can find the latest version of the Character Model at
> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/charmod-edit/ . 
> 
> Best regards,
> Richard Ishida, for the I18N WG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DECISIONS REQUIRING A RESPONSE
> ==============================
> 
> C024	Na	Na	C	Jeremy Carroll
> 	-
> 	P	MD	3.2	Is UTF-7 a unicode encoding form?
> 
>     *
>       Comment (received 2002-05-14) -- UTF-7
> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2002May/0011.html]
> 
>       Is UTF-7 a unicode encoding form? (I am pretty ignorant about UTF-7
> but I believe it exists and is a UCS).
>     *
>       Decision: Not applicable.
> 
>       We have classified this comment as 'not applicable', because it is
> only a question.
> 
>       Our answer is that yes and no. UTF-7 can be considered an unicode
> encoding form, or not. It is an unicode encoding form to the extent that it
> encodes a sequence of unicode characters. However, it does not map a
> character to an identifiable sequence of bytes, and has a number of other
> rather undesirable properties. It was designed for use in very special cases
> such as Email, but has widely been replaced by UTF-8, and is no longer
> recommended for use, to the extent that we decided that the most adequate
> way to handle it in the Character Model was to completely ignore it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> USEFUL LINKS
> ==============
> [1] The version of CharMod you commented on: 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/
> [2] Latest editor's version (still being edited): 
> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/charmod-edit/
> [3] Last Call comments table, sorted by ID: 
> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 23 January 2004 16:35:18 UTC