- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:00:46 +0200
- To: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
- Cc: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > On 8/27/2014 10:37 AM, Richard Ishida wrote: >> "Historically encodings and their specifications (if any) were kept track >> of by the IANA Character Sets registry. For the purposes of specifications >> using this specification, that registry no longer relevant." > > This last version is workable in the sense that it removes objectionable > statements. It is, however,less relevant to the users of the specification. Why? It explains that for their purposes IANA Character Sets is done for. > I personally would find some statement along the line given in the quote > starting with "User agents..." preferable because it addresses the issue > from the point of view of users of the specification (as well as writers of > derived specifications), and presents the loss of relevance of the IANA > registry as consequence of a particular (and important) design decisions > and not as an axiom. It does not just apply to user agents. It's also the case for developers, specification editors, users, etc. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Sunday, 31 August 2014 18:01:14 UTC