- From: <ned.freed@innosoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 17:44:07 -0800 (PST)
- To: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
- Cc: 'Keld Jørn Simonsen' <keld@dkuug.dk>, Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>, Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>, ietf-charsets@innosoft.com
> Agreed. Also, the ITU-T T.series and IETF Internet Fax WG
> protocols have normative references to each other. And several
> W3C specs have normative references to the IANA Charset Registry.
> Planned incoherence is short-sighted.
Please cite an example of an ITU protocol that:
(1) Uses a textual strings to identify charsets.
(2) Specifically uses one of the new aliases in question.
(3) Forms some part of an IETF protocol now, or is planned to in the
future.
If such a protocol exists, then there's a legitimate case for registering
these aliases. If not...
Charset names aren't simply names -- they are strings intended for use on the
wire. Noting all sorts of strings used to refer to a given charset in the
registration information is fine, but such names should not be aliases unless
there's some chance of them appearing on our wires.
Ned
Received on Monday, 3 April 2000 20:53:25 UTC