[art] Re: draft-bray-unichars-09 review

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 08 October 2024 17:29 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FDE5C1840D1 for <art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 10:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmx.de
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Cakk1cosN3q for <art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 10:29:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2C9CC151986 for <art@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 10:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1728408546; x=1729013346; i=julian.reschke@gmx.de; bh=35jKJ50dUyzQVe68O+631CSJbZgJoR/KM3O7PLWYq2Y=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To: References:From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=KmUh9kynyWhXl46yaSmvGrfJ3qE73buGQ2SZZXC+qDsZQtRbhxnpaJ4UbjLtPIxs TGKIWtpWB46NXv9ZbbOd8hZIgSlm13FFQ8Om/0sKmgz46BJzeEpCQPtsIB9ZUL/zM ZSeo41xvWpJCDy6L1Fw9Ao4qsTMpx+iyuEHhR3GkIGDDcpnKpeC787VkT/p0bOu2Q 7zLpWGhsKGlv8S+q+6oaiH5xuJDVyqX6JGFgIu90WSDBzZR2wUhsYdZ4GwY24Pg7e gsEy8YD1bK8VQ7BLwwpK2+oc4czH+o0/uzYA44QKRzd0lDd7NvjwgAJFyDxyjHWjv GqyOru/IZ72kDl1g8w==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from [192.168.178.192] ([91.61.50.61]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MG9g4-1tCVEE09s4-00D52W for <art@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 19:29:06 +0200
Message-ID: <e0e79e83-b198-4dfe-9bd7-29118706c666@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2024 19:29:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: art@ietf.org
References: <CAN8C-_JkHcer1MbvwSrtFxFu_38JRy-_JstYOmAMdOVCdCe-0g@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6itokOYJb6ZWUfvct7O7AqDsULvYUrtBqm25Wy-7TxOM4Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6itokOYJb6ZWUfvct7O7AqDsULvYUrtBqm25Wy-7TxOM4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:lD+PamiuRs/IwNPfGQH0dDk5oX+uKD8FDE2kP46cG/Y+qEKK8q7 9ggi38WDaZA7T50wNWKZRJYM4tQDw5EkbIo1CUQ3cYLlwmZ45yUVdUJjBT6LydG3vJffvez S/YHM07OUT6yOykSh+XnQ+xDZGivVwtz5HWjMYy3WF6zWIoZWdDkO6NEvMZL58K6QWRxQSb Y3rohy3HrCq/peliqMnag==
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:I6IKmm7kGoU=;eYkSjeY/4RZkRxeGyrGRaRXOOnV g1s4JmcTqXqT7lXD2Ha7g3xsQS8KaqBd33h7rHAcJpDjMQmaep9f+Er9WRaBr2kQ3ci2BZkBs iJoM+F7oqQRWuJDFBV4S8UfKDBwJGLnxA1Kt1xfQgHDV6aTKX/P0syXiI439/BMTibQJQV4mu yxLHcnSvot9hXouDOnIfp8Rxh/7SayUTO7hswqozUQHsL6nRBmZImo8N0hJcOWfprNNzGDrg8 DwO6wV138otY7215TtaSBtPGpXGnFy7gbRG70hE8V8FpnsVu5W0P1E2DAoGQ71+5Ava9bqPwi iNoEhBze8Wor2Zn/0cnhFO5AZnycwnv6psi8ESOKO4kIhn9UgciBmr+v43iqvY39+75VHIYYr ysdMvOO7vMtX0KX9ImstF77UU8qYgvhywNT+Aos2x/Uau0t9ULJmvuJy5pXLfYuSxT+D+dPeY hzW1zwyX9QHRzARk0jsIu6xU+3pNLD/T1J0tfFOAIO3N83PEEYSyv9U+RxWwsRRVeM2d+nGVm Fl1reVjKJPGQHPUNpYcEphg9WJ8S+hfth/SLKZPgR+HvDzyJDIOy+VWWqercGNuMRZOJOq3HF OgZtp/Uz0rvdqJdr9wA0UF64lwBovLRgmKIBfHRHjZtnecqYoA3YRfoSirSzcaZ9J1GTr81jl 2OWvEJ+qu0oPxqz9O+csIl0ufp2T/jtsJPKjWmbEEFscVdoOQ3iVINkkSOYTfkH8mZZJJ+MMh Y7JPjQ0Skd6FirRaYgj/3am8bss/nHZwV3XbdxOjdA7mg4k6N7s6c0Rn7EtHu3T0JaNcTSyfg g/aSY+iBlFT0HIfoatsMv6qA==
Message-ID-Hash: RTJ56JS73MKPIEU76BVRWF3EM53TGZV6
X-Message-ID-Hash: RTJ56JS73MKPIEU76BVRWF3EM53TGZV6
X-MailFrom: julian.reschke@gmx.de
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-art.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc5
Precedence: list
Subject: [art] Re: draft-bray-unichars-09 review
List-Id: Applications and Real-Time Area Discussion <art.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/Azeif51BXuZ-HR-1TA-INNiuX-4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/art>
List-Help: <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:art-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:art@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:art-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:art-leave@ietf.org>

Am 08.10.2024 um 18:51 schrieb Tim Bray:
> On Oct 4, 2024 at 7:22:12 AM, Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries> wrote:
>>
>> ## Comments
>>
>> ### Lack of BCP14 Guidance
>
> [This is just me, haven’t talked over Orie’s contributions with Paul yet.]
>
> This is a really interesting issue.  Our vision of how this would be
> used successfully was along the lines of:
>
>  1. WG takes up a draft. That draft says "the value of this field is
>     Unicode text." Maybe it even says "…encoded in UTF-8.”
>  2. Someone (co-chair, WG member, AD, last-call commenter) says “Which
>     Unicode characters? Go look at [Unichars].”
>  3. The draft editor says “Oh, OK” and specifies one of the subsets from
>     [Unichars] or maybe [PRECIS].
>
>
> So, how can we use BCP14 to encourage this happening?  What would
> people’s feelings be if we added a sentence, perhaps as a new paragraph
> in the section 2 introduction, just before 2.1, reading as follows:
>
> “It is RECOMMENDED that designers of protocols and data formats, for any
> data field which contains textual data, consider the issues discussed in
> this document. They SHOULD specify, for that data field, the use of one
> of the subsets specified in this document or one of the profiles
> specified in [PRECIS].”
>
> I’ve never written BCP14 language that operates at the meta level like
> this, aimed at designers of new protocols and data formats, rather than
> describing a specific protocol/format. Is it even a thing? Are there
> other examples?
> ...

I believe we should avoid BCP14 keywords here; they are for protocol
definitions (etc), not to put requirements on other specs or even spec
authors.

Best regards, Julian