- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 22:40:10 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/issues/#i66 On 28/05/2007, at 10:29 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > Hi, > > we currently have the following reference (<http://www.w3.org/ > Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/draft-lafon- > rfc2616bis-02.html#ISO-8859>): > > [ISO-8859] > International Organization for Standardization, > "Information technology - 8-bit single byte coded > graphic > - character sets", 1987-1990. > > Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1, ISO-8859-1:1987. Part 2: > Latin alphabet No. 2, ISO-8859-2, 1987. Part 3: Latin > alphabet No. 3, ISO-8859-3, 1988. Part 4: Latin > alphabet > No. 4, ISO-8859-4, 1988. Part 5: Latin/Cyrillic > alphabet, > ISO-8859-5, 1988. Part 6: Latin/Arabic alphabet, ISO- > 8859-6, 1987. Part 7: Latin/Greek alphabet, ISO-8859-7, > 1987. Part 8: Latin/Hebrew alphabet, ISO-8859-8, 1988. > Part 9: Latin alphabet No. 5, ISO-8859-9, 1990. > > Proposed changes: > > - classify as normative, > > - just cite ISO-8859-1 (the other variants aren't needed by HTTP/1.1), > > - update to latest version. > > This would make it: > > [ISO-8859-1] > International Organization for Standardization, > "Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded > graphic > character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1", ISO/ > IEC 8859-1:1998, 1998. > > Best regards, JUlian > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 12:40:34 UTC