- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 16:42:19 -0700
- To: Chris Newman <chris.newman@INNOSOFT.COM>, ietf-charsets@iana.org
At 03:15 PM 5/3/99 -0700, Chris Newman wrote: >Before this goes to last call, I just wanted to say that permitting >multiple byte orderings in this context has a high probability of leading >to interoperability problems similar to past problems caused by permitting >multiple endian orders in a protocol. Note that only UTF-16 has this problem; UTF-16BE and UTF-16LE do not have multiple byte orderings. Because of this, I believe that most systems will try to use BE and LE. >(4) If UTF-16 has interoperability problems, it will just strengthen >support for UTF-8 and RFC 2277. Since I think UTF-8 is a better solution >in most cases anyway, I see little merit in fighting to make UTF-16 more >attractive. I fully agree with both sentences. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium
Received on Monday, 3 May 1999 19:43:34 UTC