Re: FWD: I-D ACTION:draft-klensin-unicode-escapes-00.txt

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 29 January 2007 14:04 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HBX7n-0005rx-HV; Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:04:47 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HBX7m-0005rr-I0 for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:04:46 -0500
Received: from ns.jck.com ([209.187.148.211] helo=bs.jck.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HBX7k-0007ci-9f for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:04:46 -0500
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1HBX7g-000Luz-7D; Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:04:40 -0500
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:04:39 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: "Clive D.W. Feather" <clive@demon.net>
Subject: Re: FWD: I-D ACTION:draft-klensin-unicode-escapes-00.txt
Message-ID: <212BD43DEF5902CBAAEE9CB9@p3.JCK.COM>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.7 (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: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581
Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.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, 22 January, 2007 08:48 +0000 "Clive D.W. Feather"
<clive@demon.net> wrote:

> Please remove the term "extended ASCII" from 1.1 - there is no
> such thing. If you want to talk about an 8 bit character set,
> then "the ISO 8859 family" would do.

FWIW, while I fixed this text, more or less as you suggested
(and it needed fixing), there actually was an ANSI Standard
"ASCII-8" for a while.  If I recall, it was ultimately withdrawn
in favor of ANSI/INCITS endorsement of ISO 8859-1, but "extended
ASCII" was actually well-defined.

     john