Re: [apps-discuss] Documenting UTF-1 as Historic

Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com> Fri, 10 June 2011 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <evnikita2@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC1DE11E8109 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:47:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.487
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xidgz9JHXhij for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:47:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9FD311E8090 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:47:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm15 with SMTP id 15so1941102fxm.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aegEFxJOYV0wLqLS2tylruuiCB9YzMyXqH9sv5uwJik=; b=oYyCv4CY0llZkcz5/x8nQp7HuE75sWe0/FiwugANXTtM5IGXqmU186xlHynnVheO25 SNvSzxUffHtBYIgY+GjyXXt0Jdajsbl//ftT6ryitEeRPFGvSbQx1+yZDJAjhd9o2g5T ICeh2Ffct1uSy7gMNoi+IXOoOx2MHYqzYkwqw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=JcamBF5y3rvWaLU7XjKXwSwtaRsotVVdj2j8KvEWf0BZsdyXqE0qqDtr8whqkEWWfu j1Mglm3dQBjxf2dsnsjopHUfrsjrL5jLjwiO23uMjnfqnbwokc6Dg6raorKm0DHTWzh2 GdjHpvGAdzvkaPGS4MimG2G4I1WRU6cvqSDS0=
Received: by 10.223.51.4 with SMTP id b4mr367124fag.93.1307720858085; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([195.191.104.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m26sm1113326fab.10.2011.06.10.08.47.36 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:47:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4DF23CC6.7040607@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 18:48:22 +0300
From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ru; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
References: <4DF23976.4080301@gmail.com> <4DF23BD4.1080802@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4DF23BD4.1080802@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Apps-discuss list <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Documenting UTF-1 as Historic
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:47:40 -0000

10.06.2011 18:44, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2011-06-10 17:34, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> There are a number of RFCs defining transformation formats of ISO
>> 10646/Unicode - various UTFs. I mean RFC 3629 (UTF-8), RFC 2152 (UTF-7),
>> RFC 2781 (UTF-16) and others. However, I've noticed UTF-1 isn't properly
>> documented (or, at least, there is no formal record of it). However,
>> since UTF-1 has never been widely used, I suppose it could be formally
>> documented in Historic RFC, taking
>> http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/ISO-IR/178.pdf as a basis. Any thoughts on
>> this?
>> ...
>
> Yes. Why do we care?
>
We care to have a formal record of UTF-1, as I explained above.