RE: [Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem

"Kent Karlsson" <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se> Wed, 11 July 2007 23:06 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I8lGX-0005AA-0o; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:06:37 -0400
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1I8lGW-0005A4-0w for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:06:36 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I8lGV-00059q-L9 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:06:35 -0400
Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I8lGU-0003DB-Sp for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:06:35 -0400
Received: from c83-248-107-106.bredband.comhem.se ([83.248.107.106]:4543 helo=WGBGKKA02) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>) id 1I8lGL-0006gf-85 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 01:06:26 +0200
From: Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>
To: 'LTRU Working Group' <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <E1I8cnC-0002Sj-7h@megatron.ietf.org><4694E57E.5030909@yahoo-inc.com><DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579560F3CD6B8B@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <30b660a20707111413t5cec1d3fs3d6bc83d3852dfa5@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 01:05:32 +0200
Message-ID: <000001c7c410$198b0310$6a6bf853@streamserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <30b660a20707111413t5cec1d3fs3d6bc83d3852dfa5@mail.gmail.com>
Thread-Index: AcfEAGGbpEtUn5/0TCuSXVo2THTtKgAApCMg
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-Originating-IP: 83.248.107.106
X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1I8lGL-0006gf-85.
X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1I8lGL-0006gf-85 995a28d721158ddc226ece251b1b3742
X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: 4b66a1e94d7d92973ece9e5da449ff80
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0493260941=="
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

+1


  _____  

From: Mark Davis [mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 11:14 PM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem


+1


On 7/11/07, Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> wrote: 

+1

-----Original Message-----
From: Addison Phillips [mailto:addison@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 7:13 AM
To: Debbie Garside
Cc: Peter Constable; 'LTRU Working Group' 
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem

Voting isn't the measure: rough consensus is the measure. I agree that a
strawpoll would help establish if we have consensus, though.

I, of course, have always supported putting the registry into UTF-8. If 
folks are happy with the resolution to the parser compatibility issue,
I'm happy to go to UTF-8.

So:

+1

Addison

Debbie Garside wrote:
> Couldn't we just put it to the vote?  I thought we had this discussion a 
> year or so ago?
>
> FWIW, my vote would be +1
>
> Best regards
>
> Debbie
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Constable [mailto:  <mailto:petercon@microsoft.com> petercon@microsoft.com]
>> Sent: 10 July 2007 17:20
>> To: LTRU Working Group; ietf-languages@iana.org
>> Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem 
>>
>>> From: Chris Newman [mailto:Chris.Newman@Sun.COM]
>>
>>> UTF-8 has been the recommend charset for Internet interchange since
>>> RFC 2277. 
>>> Our past experience with ASCII encodings of non-ASCII text
>> in the IETF
>>> has been questionable... Meanwhile, UTF-8 based IETF protocols have
>>> been less problematic from an interoperability viewpoint... 
>> Sound to me like good arguments for us to be considering
>> UTF-8 for the LSTR.
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> Ltru mailing list
>> Ltru@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

--
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.
Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature. 


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru  <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru> 





-- 
Mark 

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru