RE: [Ltru] UTF-8

> From: Addison Phillips [mailto:addison@yahoo-inc.com]

> I think we should close this discussion. We're unlikely to make it
> further this time than last...

Before we kill this off too quickly...

I don't remember all the discussion from the last time around, but seems to me we at least have identified a small set of core issues:

1) Would UTF-8 be desirable (all other things being equal)?

2) Is such a breaking change in the registry acceptable?

3) Does the content of a registry edit have to be exchanged in email bodies on IETF-languages and be in the same encoding in those emails?

Randy broke 3 into two parts, which I'll modify slightly:

3a) Do we need or want to stick with communicating proposed registry edits solely in the body of emails?

3b) If "yes" to 3a, then can we use a different representation in discussion on IETF-languages and depend on the LST Reviewer (or his assistants) and IANA between them to convert the content as needed?

I think there is consensus on 1. If we are willing to discuss this a bit further, it might be helpful to focus on 2 before 3.

Wrt 2: Non-ASCII content would appear in certain attribute fields accompanying a subtag: only in description or comment fields. Would there really be parsers that make assumptions about the content of these fields, or that assume only byte values within the range 0x20 - 0x7E would be encountered?

Peter

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