W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > September 2002

RE: Editorial issue 261: Choose character encoding UTF8/16

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 19:08:13 -0400
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Nilo Mitra" <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "W3C Public Archive" <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF5EC39075.324BE43F-ON85256C29.007DB0A6@lotus.com>

Not sure, I was going to suggest an alternative with a note duplicating 
the values.  Something along the lines of:

Note:  I share your (implied) concern about duplicating normative info 
from other texts.  On the other hand I share Gudge's concern with the 
pushback about implied indirection.  Three levels seems deep.  Would it be 
the lesser of the evils to say:

"Completing the transmission of a request message and the reception of a 
response message. The response message is assumed to be a SOAP envelope 
serialized according the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media 
type given in the Content-Type header field.
Note:  For the case of "application/soap+xml", charset issues are 
described in [SOAP Media], which recommends the use of utf-8" [RFC2279] 
and "utf-16" [RFC2781]."

Not perfect, but I think it emphasizes that the source of the normative 
recommendation is through the media type description.  I'm not sure it's 
important to point out the second level of indirection, as the utf8/utf16 
recommendation is essentially part of the soap media type, even if it gets 
there by reference.

Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

"Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
09/03/2002 11:20 AM

        To:     "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" 
<moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Nilo Mitra" 
<EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, "Noah Mendelson" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
        cc:     "W3C Public Archive" <www-archive@w3.org>
        Subject:        RE: Editorial issue 261: Choose character encoding UTF8/16

If we get pushback then I suggest we add a note pointing out the
dependency chain but not actually incorporate the values. Does that

>I am happy that our spec is complete given what we do 
>reference. However, one of the complaints was the number of 
>levels of indirection between our spec and the piece of text 
>that says UTF-8/UTF-16. 
>That said, I'm comfortable with taking no action. How about 
>everyone else?

Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 19:09:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:31:53 UTC