- 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