Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: IETF-822

"John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Fri, 15 June 2012 21:44 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7564F11E80DF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:44:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rBclForlk0j6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C12811E80CE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 10211 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2012 21:44:15 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:vbr-info:user-agent:cleverness; s=27e2.4fdbacaf.k1206; bh=BROG70rRLQDkRYYuOwlRlh4vBVXnJBvdyMvsfQBq7js=; b=mTaNZkMOlSJUH6gKqNjgcwWLe2q+YGLK8Aw1UfjTcrJbcKTzHPDiw6OCxu7gGvk+wIyD3zCJ1oCG0/dQqpOIPhL8PRnJBBxUIU+FavUIMOPF8PKC29GYPSNTpwWHkq5HNBiuGjBmmaD1cFsMd0061BNTt8IZlFEhbuRbu2yOuFQ=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Received: (ofmipd 127.0.0.1); 15 Jun 2012 21:43:52 -0000
Date: 15 Jun 2012 17:44:14 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206151743480.97707@joyce.lan>
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: "John C Klensin" <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: IETF-822
In-Reply-To: <60F818CB9BBA86B709B1E1D2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
References: <20120615195854.71801.qmail@joyce.lan> <60F818CB9BBA86B709B1E1D2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
Cleverness: None detected
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="3825401791-1873958699-1339796654=:97707"
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:44:16 -0000

Do we have to rehash all of this stuff AGAIN?

R's,
John

> Huh?   ISO/IEC 646 IRV (another candidate for a FoPSCII
> precursor) replaces the ASCII $, not #, with that universal
> currency symbol.  As for that vertical bar, sufficiently elderly
> practitioners of the art of Character Confusion and Coding (CCS)
> will recall that the ancient Earthling-Based Convention for
> Difficult Information Coding included two peculiar characters: a
> mathematical "not" sign that closely resembled Unicode's "⌐"
> (U+2310) and that broken vertical bar.  Those characters spawned
> multiple wars over how they should be mapped into "ASCII" and
> "ISO/IEC 646" with one group arguing for caret and (solid)
> vertical bar, another for tilde and exclamation mark, and a
> third for exclamation mark and [solid] vertical bar.  After much
> bloodshed, 16 and 32 bit character sets were invented so that
> almost everyone could contemplate their cakes while eating them
> and continued dissenters were tortured until they repented.
>
> Those battles were repeated in the development of FoPSCII when
> it was noticed that the 5th character of the Klingon alphabet
> was confusable with both the not-sign, Greek upper case Gamma,
> and  Latin "r".  In addition, the Klingon numeral 8 was easily
> confused with Cyrillic "Ж".  This created a variant problem
> that the Intergalactic Consortium for Arbitrary Names and
> Numbers could not dismiss because of some of the advocates had a
> more effective means of persuasion than merely hiring lawyers.
>
> :-(
>