[Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem

"Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> Sat, 07 July 2007 18:27 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I7F0B-0001BB-Uh; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:27:27 -0400
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1I7F0B-00018J-Aa for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:27:27 -0400
Received: from [] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I7F0A-00016k-WC for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:27:27 -0400
Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I7F06-0004qe-M0 for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:27:26 -0400
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM. 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070707182722.XMHF12750.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81>; Sat, 7 Jul 2007 14:27:22 -0400
Message-ID: <007401c7c0c4$74d1ad90$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 11:27:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228
Subject: [Ltru] Re: Solving the UTF-8 problem
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>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

>>> I still think the email argument is the compelling one.  We *will* 
>>> have corruption no matter what.
>> This argument is only meaningful for the format we use to discuss 
>> changes to the registry content.  It has no bearing on the format of 
>> the registry itself.
> That is only so if we have some means other than email for 
> communicating with IANA.

I really think we can overcome this is we aren't limited to both (1) 
plain-text e-mail and (2) sending IANA something that they can paste in 
with no processing.

I suggested sending the payload as an attachment, and Randy suggested 
that IANA might be able to handle some amount of post-processing.  We 
might combine approaches: we could send hex-escaped ASCII in the body of 
the message *and* attach a file containing the same content in UTF-8, 
and leave it up to them to either post-process the hex escapes or just 
use the attachment.  (Or we could ask them which they prefer.)  Either 
way, there will be no shortage of eagle eyes double-checking the new 
Registry to make sure they did it right.

Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14

Ltru mailing list