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

Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Fri, 10 June 2011 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@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 859CD11E8151 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 g49aAPvfhZzy for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21DD11E8126 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:45:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so1498746pvh.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:45:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=auGMpxYivJaHezT7WGX3E89iC5o5rmshgT9iSR8g9ms=; b=mDWjJshAbk62Cs0pXIH/IKMnJ9O+y8RTzWoK6W/fertrvtZqwgZrmJKj0FeB6qOD4A LbGBUvGv5KJOQaY2GaF1kKWH5L4LIO/Gq8BKXWRnMfZexOgLUlUjG+azlfvkNT6TwX5K wuUIVuJwGGODOYYj9TH/7nLE5voSUR1Gz+t1w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=WUk/OFlyZMsKaY5U9Q2i6ynVt/XqbM2FrqCaqSb5JyQjCxnTmo4niUd5KgiAJ+woFl 06JvL3KXvTJJxOAKzxo9+pwDx48nXw/TBOJ6GAki+e6odbkyKPDAwbhmRDnK5VH3it5X ZKWROpco9RD2Zea4VBUJBbS+hXLwhI0nmQuc8=
Received: by 10.143.27.11 with SMTP id e11mr435602wfj.289.1307731504262; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:45:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.143.34.19 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4DF23976.4080301@gmail.com>
References: <4DF23976.4080301@gmail.com>
From: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:44:44 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTinBU7EML6DXG9gcSkgs8speWL54aA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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 18:45:17 -0000

On 10 June 2011 17:34, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:

> I suppose it could be formally documented
> in Historic RFC

In theory.  But the IETF (etc.) never used UTF-1
for anything.  ISO deprecated UTF-1 years ago,
and of course they still formally document it:

http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/ISO-IR/178.pdf

Admittedly that page is hard to find, but OTOH
the en-wikipedia UTF-1 article lists it as its
one and only external reference (at the moment).

> Any thoughts on this?

Unless somebody did it already:  It would be a
very good thing to deprecate UTF-7 "officially"
in an RFC, because UTF-7 is at least in theory
an IETF invention.

There was an AD willing to sponsor this effort
in 2007, maybe the new ADs also like the idea.
The author of the UTF-7 RFC has no objections
(and should certainly get credits for his stunt
 to register a "moving target" as IANA charset
 before UTF-8 existed, and when Unicode was
 still only registered with a version number).

As far as HTML5 and WhatWG care about standards
they should also welcome if UTF-7 is "formally"
dead.  If you volunteer for this effort you can
also talk about UTF-1 "just for the records" if
you wish.

-Frank