- From: <~ned+charsets-errors@sigurd.innosoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 19:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "+d1:[mailserv.files.ietf-charsets]archive.digest"@INNOSOFT.COM, CHRIS+IETF-CHARSETS@INNOSOFT.COM
A 18: 36 98-03-30 +0000, Misha Wolf a *crit : >Why do we need the aliases? I suggest (just): > > Name: ISO-8859-15 (preferred MIME name) [Alain] : I thought about it too. You may be right, an alias would perhaps mislead people less. By chance Latin 1 was part 1 of the ISO/IEC 8859 series... We do not have this privilege with latin 9 and that might be confusing indeed. I'm not alone to make this recommendation then but I believe it might be better too, although some other people might prefer only "Latin 9" then as a name... So I don't know. Is there a harm to have one alias for MIME usage? Why were aliases created in the first place? Were there problems encountered with those as I suspect (the more it is complex, the more it is error-prone)? Alain LaBonté Québec ________ [Misha] : >Misha Wolf >Chair, W3C I18N WG > [Marc] : >> Hi, >> modified request per comments: >> - removed alias latin0 >> - preferred alias in uppercase >> - csISOLatin changed to 9 >> >> The new request will be: >> >> Name: ISO-8859-15 >> Alias: ISO-8859-15 (preferred MIME name) >> Alias: latin9 >> Alias: csISOLatin9 >> >> >> Since the ISO standard is at its final ballot stage, then I will wait until >> final approval and resubmit it to the list at that time. In between, >> people can use it for software development. >> >> Thanks everybody, >> >> Marc. >> >> >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------- >> Marc Blanchet | Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca >> Viagénie inc. | http://www.viagenie.qc.ca >> 3107 des hôtels | tél.: 418-656-9254 >> Ste-Foy, Québec | fax.: 418-656-0183 >> Canada, G1W 4W5 | radio: VA2-JAZ >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> pgp: 57 86 A6 83 D3 A8 58 32 F7 0A BB BD 5F B2 4B A7 >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Auteur du livre TCP/IP Simplifié, Éditions Logiques, 1997 >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, >except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of >Reuters Ltd. --Boundary (ID uEbHHWxWEwCKT9wM3evJ5w)
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 1998 19:49:44 UTC