- From: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:15:33 -0700
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, "Whistler, Ken" <ken.whistler@sap.com>
- CC: www-international@w3.org, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Mark Davis ☕️ <mark@macchiato.com>
On 8/28/2014 12:18 PM, Phillips, Addison wrote: > Hi Ken and Asmus, > > Recently you helped us address the issue [0] of the Unicode "violation" statements in the Encoding [1] specification. Based on your recommendations/suggestions, the document has been changed and no longer says that it "violates" any Unicode requirements. The editor's copy that reflects our changes is at [2]. > > The specific quotes still in the document now read: > > [Section 4.2] > -- > This is a much simpler and more restrictive algorithm of mapping labels to encodings than section 1.4 of Unicode Technical Standard #22 prescribes, as that is found to be necessary to be compatible with deployed content. I think I would have chosen "recommends" instead of "prescribes" because if I remember correctly the passage in #22 uses "should". > -- > > [Section 14.2] > -- > Checking for and using a byte order mark happens before an encoding to decode a byte stream is chosen, as seen in the decode algorithm, as is deemed more accurate than any label. > -- > > The W3C process requires that I get an indication that you are "satisfied" by our changes. Could you please reply to this email and indicate whether the changes in the document meet with your approval? Sure. Satisfactorily as is, or you can make the further wording change as suggested above. A./ > > Regards (for I18N), > > Addison > > [0] http://www.w3.org/International/docs/encoding/encoding-doc.html#issue-385 > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/encoding/ > [2] http://encoding.spec.whatwg.org/ > > > Addison Phillips > Globalization Architect (Amazon Lab126) > Chair (W3C I18N WG) > > Internationalization is not a feature. > It is an architecture. > >
Received on Friday, 29 August 2014 00:15:52 UTC