- From: John C Klensin <john+w3c@jck.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2025 09:11:43 -0400
- To: "Addison Phillips (W3C Calendar)" <noreply+calendar@w3.org>
- cc: Internationalization Working Group <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Addison,
I've looked through the latest specdev update. Much better, but I'd
still finding the "encoding" and "character encoding" terminology
problematic, especially since, in another context, I recently got
pulled into a discussion about the legitimacy of HTTP 1.0 and 1.1.
Suggestion:
Put in a few sentences, possibly under "Useful background and
overviews for this section" or immediately following it, or at least
before the first "Note" in Section 4.6 that says something like:
"The term 'encoding' or 'character encoding' has
historically been used in a variety of different ways when
character representation and processing are concerned. In
this document (section?) it refers both to the different
encoding methods specified in conjunction with the Unicode
Standard and to the historically large collection of
non-Unicode Coded Character Sets. Unless otherwise
specified, only Unicode is under discussion in this section."
That may eliminate the need to go into the details implied by
"Explain the relationship between windows-1252, Latin1, and ASCII" of
ticket #2000. If it does not, it would lay the foundation for that
explanation. And, btw, if was are going to pursue that, ISO/IEC 8859
and its various components should be part of the explanation, not
just 8859-1, which I believe is the most common specific/standard
definition of "Latin1" or "Latin-1"..
john
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2025 13:11:55 UTC