Re: 8bit & i18n (was Re: ietf-nntp My notes ...)
Paul Overell <paulo@turnpike.com> Thu, 19 December 1996 10:33 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa27488; 19 Dec 96 5:33 EST
Received: from ACADEM2.ACADEM.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05981;
19 Dec 96 5:33 EST
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by academ2.academ.com (8.8.3/8.7.3) id
EAA14704 for ietf-nntp-outgoing; Thu, 19 Dec 1996 04:30:48 -0600 (CST)
X-Authentication-Warning: academ2.academ.com: majordomo set sender to
owner-ietf-nntp using -f
Received: from academ.com (root@ACADEM.COM [198.137.249.2]) by
academ2.academ.com (8.8.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA14699 for
<ietf-nntp@ACADEM2.ACADEM.COM>; Thu, 19 Dec 1996 04:30:46 -0600 (CST)
Received: from office.demon.net (office.demon.net [193.195.224.1]) by
academ.com (8.8.3/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA13219 for <ietf-nntp@academ.com>;
Thu, 19 Dec 1996 04:30:44 -0600 (CST)
Received: from pillar.turnpike.com ([194.70.55.2]) by office.demon.net
id aa24379; 19 Dec 96 10:25 GMT
Message-ID: <HSJOrDA6fRuyQApj@turnpike.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 10:24:58 +0000
To: ietf-nntp@academ.com
From: Paul Overell <paulo@turnpike.com>
Subject: Re: 8bit & i18n (was Re: ietf-nntp My notes ...)
In-Reply-To: <199612190355.VAA08016@academ.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 3.02 beta 5 <U2yaxlNz9m7tpk5wwwfqeW1so7>
Sender: owner-ietf-nntp@academ.com
Precedence: bulk
In article <199612190355.VAA08016@academ.com>om>, Stan Barber <sob@academ.com> writes >This is really not an RFC 977bis issue. It might be an RFC 1036-related issue >since there is a newsgroups header. > Why should newsgroup name syntax be more of an issue for RFC1036bis rather than RFC977bis? Both use newsgroup names, both need to know what characters are allowed. Newsgroup name syntax is an issue for RFC977 at least in so far as the NEWNEWS command syntax implicitly requires than newsgroup names do not contain whitespace, comma, asterisk, or exclamation mark. One of the flaws in the news specs, RFC977/RFC1036, is that they both left little details like this undefined. The result of this lack of precision is that these small details get defined to be "whatever the software does". This may have been tolerable where there was only one implementation, but not now. For example, the thread on back filling only arose because RFC977 failed to define the detail of article numbering, everyone "knew" that article numbers are monotonic. These little details, such as newsgroup name syntax, need specifying. -- Paul Overell T U R N P I K E Ltd
- Re: 8bit & i18n (was Re: ietf-nntp My notes ...) Stan Barber
- Re: 8bit & i18n (was Re: ietf-nntp My notes ...) Paul Overell