Re: [ire] CSV and RFC4180

["Gould, James" <[e-mail]>]

Gustavo,

I don't believe that the file encoding is the key determinate of the file
format decision.  The CSV draft includes an encoding attribute with the
default of UTF-8.  It's up to the producer and consumer to support the
appropriate encoding of the data in any case whether we're talking about
XML as the file format or CSV.  I don't believe we would have any issue
producing or consuming UTF-8 encoded CSV files.

-- 

JG
 

 
James Gould
Principal Software Engineer
[e-mail]
 
703-948-3271 (Office)
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
VerisignInc.com







On 12/13/12 1:00 PM, "Gustavo Lozano" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Colleagues,
>
>I find the proposal of Comma-Separated Values (CSV) Objects Mapping
>interesting and I think that both approaches CSV or XML for escrow data
>have its advantages and disadvantages.
>
>The only RFC related to CSV that I have found is RFC4180.
>
>This text from RFC4180 concerns me:
>TEXTDATA =  %x20-21 / %x23-2B / %x2D-7E
>
>The escrow deposit will contain non US-ASCII data.
>
>How can we be sure that the libraries/database tools used to implement the
>export/import of CSV will adequately work with non US-ASCII data? There
>are different platforms and architectures used by different players
>(EBEROs, registry operators and data escrow agents) that will be upgraded
>and will evolve during time.
>
>In this regard I feel more confortable with XML because Unicode support
>have been present since the beginning.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>Regards,
>Gustavo Lozano
>
>_______________________________________________
>ire mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ire