Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Straw-man charter for http-bis]
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 20 August 2007 07:22 UTC
Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1IN1af-0007mJ-CS; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:22:21 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1IN1ad-0007iA-PY for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org;
Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:22:19 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IN1ad-0007i0-Fy
for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:22:19 -0400
Received: from ns.jck.com ([209.187.148.211] helo=bs.jck.com)
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IN1ac-0004ak-2s
for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:22:19 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM)
by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34)
id 1IN1aS-000Iou-8C; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:22:08 -0400
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:22:06 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Straw-man
charter for http-bis]
Message-ID: <157F4F253535B9C73F8EDC75@p3.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <088FB13E-F12F-4BE7-94FB-78B21C51512E@mnot.net>
References: <BA772834-227A-4C1B-9534-070C50DF05B3@mnot.net>
<392C98BA-E7B8-44ED-964B-82FC48162924@mnot.net>
<p06240843c2833f4d7f2f@[10.20.30.108]> <465D9142.9050506@gmx.de>
<6.0.0.20.2.20070610165356.0a69cec0@localhost>
<088FB13E-F12F-4BE7-94FB-78B21C51512E@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081
Cc: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>, Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>,
Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>,
"ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>,
Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols
<discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>,
<mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>,
<mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org
--On Monday, 20 August, 2007 13:40 +1000 Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > On 10/06/2007, at 6:05 PM, Martin Duerst wrote: >> - RFC 2616 prescribes that headers containing non-ASCII have >> to use either iso-8859-1 or RFC 2047. This is unnecessarily >> complex and not necessarily followed. At the least, new >> extensions should be allowed to specify that UTF-8 is used. > > My .02; > > I'm concerned about allowing UTF-8; it may break existing > implementations. And whatever is done about it should be consistent with the EAI work. Otherwise, we are likely to find ourselves in big trouble going down the line. > I'd like to see the text just require that the actual > character set be 8859-1, but to allow individual extensions to > nominate encodings *like* 2047,without being restricted to it. > For example, the encoding specified in 3987 is appropriate for > URIs. However, it *has* to be explicit; I've heard some people > read this requirement and think that they need to check > *every* header for 2047 encoding. Sigh. My own sense is that, going forward, we need to lose 8859-N, not make it the default (or only) character set for more protocols. It is, to put it mildly, a little Euro-centric (and not even completely suitable for Europe). Much of the advantage of Unicode is that one does not need to designate/ nominate a particular CCS or encoding and then maintain state for it... and that is a fairly large advantage. See also draft-klensin-unicode-escapes-03.txt(probably expired, but you should be able to find a copy somewhere -- I'll get back to it sometime soon) for a discussion of issues in ASCII encoding of multioctet character sets. The IRI spec may constrain things to encoding of octets, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If we are going to consider changes in this area, let's make them improvements. Locking in 8859-1 is not an improvement: it would, IMO, be better to deprecate its use and require explicit charset designation always if that is the only choice. john
- Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- RE: Straw-man charter for http-bis Larry Masinter
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Cyrus Daboo
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Cyrus Daboo
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Alexey Melnikov
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Alexey Melnikov
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Yves Lafon
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- RE: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis John C Klensin
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Alexey Melnikov
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter for ht… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Lisa Dusseault
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Joe Orton
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… lists
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… lists
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Chris Newman
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Lisa Dusseault
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Martin Duerst
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Adrien de Croy
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… tom.petch
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… tom.petch
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Adrien de Croy
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis der Mouse
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… tom.petch
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Straw-m… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… John C Klensin
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Clive D.W. Feather
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Martin Duerst
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Martin Duerst
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Martin Duerst
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Clive D.W. Feather
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Clive D.W. Feather
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… der Mouse
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Stefanos Harhalakis
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore