Re: RFC 5987bis WG last call - naming the encoding

On 2016-11-17 08:22, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> On 2016/11/17 15:37, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Would people object to naming this thing?
>> This would affect the abstract, the introduction, the title, and maybe
>> some more places.
>> *If* the group is ok with this,
> Giving things a name is usually a good idea.
>> would "IPE" (Internationalisation Parameter Encoding") be ok?
> First, it sounds grammatically wrong ("Internationalized Parameter
> Encoding" would be better, at least grammatically).
> Second, it somehow pretends to be the only way to encode parameters with
> non-ascii values. To avoid that, I'd prefer something like "Legacy
> Internationalized Parameter Encoding". Other ideas welcome.

"LIPE" works for me.

> I still think that using UTF-8 directly for this purpose is the right
> way to go, in line with what the rest of the IETF and the Web are doing,
> and the earlier we get there, the better.

Separate discussion :-)

Best regards, Julian

Received on Thursday, 17 November 2016 07:43:28 UTC