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

I agree with that. I also think it would be a better process for IANA to
incorporate the changes and post a "beta" for a quick review, only
afterwards updating the official version. Without that, there is always the
possibility of them posting a file, and someone using that file before the
error is discovered. Witness the jv/jw goofup, where a typo became ensconced
in implementations.

Mark

On 7/7/07, Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
> 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
> http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
> http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>

-- 
Mark