Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding"

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

My position is the same as Carsten’s.

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Apr 17, 2017, at 19:56, Nico Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >> Thinking about this more, putting an encoding detection algorithm as an
> >> appendix seems like a reasonable compromise to me.  To start, how about
> >> removing the detection text from Section 8.1 and have an appendix that
> >> starts with that text plus the table?
> >
> > Or we could even just assert that such an algorithm is possible, and
> > that implementors MAY implement one.
>
> Indeed.
>
> Broken record mode:
>
> — writing up the algorithm sounds like encouraging implementation.
>   We *don’t* want people to implement this!
>   (The whole interminable non-UTF-8 saga probably just was a nod from the
> RFC 4627 authors to the remnants of UTF-16 land, which mostly have died off
> since.  Why resurrect?)
>
> - there have been about 15 attempts to define this algorithm on the
> mailing list.
>   All were wrong.
>   An Internet Standard should contain tried and true material, not errata
> fodder.
>
> - an implementer is in a much better position to get this right than the
> standard, because they can write unit tests.
>
> >
> >> Assuming the above, what does everyone think of the following for
> >> Section 8.1?
> >
> > +1.
>
> +1
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>



-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)