W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-101 (us-ascii-ref)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:48:32 -0700
Cc: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-id: <E36DF127-B123-4AF1-9514-B922BE8CD115@apple.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

On Mar 3, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 03.03.2010 18:16, Edward O'Connor wrote:
>> Hi Julian,
>>> 2. Negative Effects
>>> None.
>> I think you've missed at least one negative effect: as far as I can
>> tell, ANSI.X3-4.1986 isn't freely available and linkable online. At
>> least, I haven't been able to find a copy that the spec could link  
>> to.
> - RFC 1345 does not define ASCII, and it's not really helpful in  
> explaining what ASCII is. If you're looking for a linkable resource  
> that actually is helpful, how about <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII 
> >?
> - That being said, I think a reference to ISO/IEC 646 would be  
> acceptable as well; this one is re-published by ECMA as ECMA-006,  
> which is available online (<http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-006.htm 
> >)

Ian, would a reference to ISO/IEC 646 aka ECMA-006 be acceptable to you?

I am trying to determine if we need a call for consensus or a call for  
counter-proposals as the next step.

Side note: it seems to me that changing the reference would be, like,  
10 minutes of work, so if this one is acceptable from a technical  
perspective, please let's consider going with it instead of dragging  
this issue out further.

Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 03:49:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:00 UTC