- From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:53:29 +0900
- To: John C Klensin <john+w3c@jck.com>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
- CC: www-international@w3.org
On 2014/08/29 07:59, John C Klensin wrote: > Given that and > speaking personally rather than predicting IETF reactions, I > would see no problem at all annotating the IANA Registry entries > for a few Charsets with comments that an alternate > interpretation has been seen in the wild, that those using that > Charset should consequently use caution, and, ideally, > describing what the deviations are. Also speaking personally and not as the "Secondary Expert" for that registry, I also see such annotations as a possibility. As I already mentioned in a different mail, updates to the registry are possible. Also, the table at http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets/character-sets.xhtml has a (currently empty) "Note" column. That wouldn't do much for > the pseudo-Unicode posing as UTF-8 situation that Andrew > describes, but it would probably work reasonably well for, e.g., > the "sometimes 'us-ascii' is really Windows 1252" problem. > > If you and others thought it worthwhile to see if we can figure > out an appropriate IETF mechanism to create that annotation, I'd > be happy to collaborate. The appropriate IETF mechanism is to "reregister" the relevant charset labels with an additional note (but ideally no other changes to avoid further bikesheding and delays). > Notes about reality, however > unfortunate that reality is, should always be welcome. It > would, however, probably not be worth the effort if all the > current Encoding spec has to say on the subject is equivalent to > "don't pay any attention to whatever the IANA Charset Registry > says" (or worse). I agree. Regards, Martin.
Received on Friday, 29 August 2014 06:54:10 UTC