- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:14:13 -0700
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Jun 15, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 15.06.2010 17:36, Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> On 2010-06-15 13:05, Sam Ruby wrote: >>> We have a change proposal to replace the reference to RFC 1345 to a >>> reference to an ANSI or ISO spec that defines ASCII, such as >>> [ANSI.X3-4.1986]: >>> >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0084.html >>> >>> At the present time, we have no counter proposals. Accordingly, the >>> chairs are issuing a call for consensus at this time. If there are no >>> objections, we will adopt this change proposal on June 22, 2010. >> >> ANSI.X3.4-1986 is apparently nowhere to be found. I even tried searching >> the ANSI website and their Standards Store for it, and came up with >> nothing at all. Referencing a specification which, for all intents and >> purposes, is effectively non-existent and unavailable in any form would >> not be useful. (It's probably printed and hidden in some archive >> somewhere, but still out of reach of most people). Lachlan - are you objecting to the call for consensus? Does your objection stand if we interpret the Change Proposal to allow other alternatives that are publicly available online, such as ECMA-006? <http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma-006.pdf> > > Nor is citing something that doesn't define it. > > Anyway, for all practical purposes everybody knows what US-ASCII is, so I doubt that it makes any difference whether the referenced document is available on-line or not. > > If you go back to the original thread, several alternative documents were mentioned (see <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0103.html>), which would be equally acceptable and available online. Julian - ECMA-006 was mentioned, are there other options you would consider acceptable? Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2010 16:14:46 UTC