RE: character sets: Term as OCTET STRING

I believe that the negotiation does not apply to OCTET STRING.  I also
believe that this is a mistake and have proposed that OCTET STRING be
included in the negotiation.  I don't know where that proposal stands today,
but I'd suggest that you assume that the OCTET STRING is now included in the
negotiation and behave accordingly.

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pieter Van Lierop [mailto:Pieter.VanLierop@geac.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:20 AM
> To: 'www-zig@w3.org'
> Subject: character sets: Term as OCTET STRING
> 
> 
> 
> I'm back in character sets...
> 
> I read on
> http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/zig/meetings/oclc2002/charneg-4.html :
> 
> "When version 3 is negotiated, this definition pertains to the
> interpretation of the ASN.1 type InternationalString in the ASN.1
> definitions in Z39.50 (both in the APDUs and all external 
> definitions in the
> standard). (...)
> When version 2 is negotiated, this definition pertains to the 
> interpretation
> of the Z39.50 ASN.1 type Term when it takes on the CHOICE of 
> OCTET STRING."
> 
> Does this mean that the character set negotiation for Term as 
> OCTET STRING
> does not apply for Z39.50 version 3 ??
> I don't remember that this has been decided. I hope this is a
> misunderstanding. If not, I disagree.
> 
> 
> Pieter van Lierop
> Geac
>