IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] Unicode in xml2rfc v3

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Fri, 18 December 2020 06:45 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBE6D3A1067; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmx.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GaXO25gQ4zuP; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F4453A1066; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28BDAF40737; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAE6CF40737 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4EmL2NRyD4-y for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98912F40723 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 22:45:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1608273918; bh=LSyXS1RF5d7Tto1r2uewOQDO4ZP2E79v0IyWY9YsUCY=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=OZHzqV/H2HIg7Jf9xP4XkMEZIznh2yBmmGfiCSqVp3LnByhLr1Fpu7PUlpv0zEUjk IIsuJJgrcr+DqX6Q4hOsbuZ93EgysodbgjKIQL6QihQJhbZWdHIpABJ062ffKn3+al X/yZmgjmpJZtFtM6eZZs67J+go9aYTCjfHw11dLo=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([84.171.154.217]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MZktj-1kceYT2EQ3-00WqUC for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 07:45:18 +0100
To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <20201216184835.CE1CA2ABC7A1@ary.qy> <AF7F0885-2D39-4F8D-A43B-E1D015146EAE@eggert.org> <72467617-6ca7-b2af-b826-d264c6b6380e@gmail.com> <D8AC8FA8-74DC-4B93-AB5B-73FBE1880F26@ietf.org> <4ef03ad3-1072-20e9-9676-2822a743a614@gmx.de> <afc0024a-e68b-0db8-90ef-1632875d2245@gmail.com> <10411562-B919-46E2-8BB2-A3D8AAD37FCC@tzi.org>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <26c8404e-2381-7c97-e257-3eccf499ffec@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 07:45:15 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <10411562-B919-46E2-8BB2-A3D8AAD37FCC@tzi.org>
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Cc62IslZeR4GVJjfVdn+TJwFZ589xRWgRNaT1l1YyHjqDxCh/c+ w1j4P486FdJSoEcePUCeGC1+vntxO7S16tP6TKH+9bOeym/PGU7jPt48hnFAYGJllYahXFT kSPtsFX6saLgxoNyTNaTRyNzHO2BqfgoNIBaUjSeSaeKRD0n8caY8QCyEaHeDkJqGa0uv9R XU9IVJO2pDEnMA79CDQ5Q==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:LoP6vyoOjAs=:G71IlAbvNLD/bzEOOldeOq vw9rgFYz7Bj9lTttdQKKKjjG9WQzwTZ/EJmegko07t7QC7sTn5pqMD0XI3fxEd4utuJVxBj+D yCohZ0nZyPDoAfuajtWmV0NN3f8zD1zlTm33QruTHd0QhueTRchwGBPMNvRr95YJalJuifTiO GlGZXXgOEaPry95P4XBdIWmU9tHPtwNCb0Y0Wh6PLhIbklv118uuai7592c7wc/b69NPZ5mFR 7m6zW/od67MY1Igb6MshDlv2e1jcTx4ZQZ+WWWvCxdQLickLYN01CJeK8dRRQJUbWgOP2kfmD 4u7hO0k9zO1QwysLX6KLjBxlMfO/Jyv6jAc/5Y9PA4JOV/Zx37CQkKJ08A60ANARWV7WOJ4PM 1m8YBfxr8bUevritI5jl3JS32pcoCD0q3/BH/KMHPTwNOlTubUB5s7m/pXHKuDs03STURl6vP auR4TmQkpZWHiT4nRlCa9r7PQbMJpXLR/sE26J3hnkr+ma1UkdGVYD9Dlo1X3KjD2prbZ6nEH RXkum5KuAM5rppOXZ7tAO9flrq14xPMC03V9UG65rAodUkxU7CTEDQ3VC38iF/lxqkgKGVitv pKNadlZOdyPRLXyxQGijSEylVCyexeDw4Ec/X0vC2ceMFlp8vOflyI2ox6koP93Mzwlg1PN0S cJfHoEhG/epbC71MXh2nr7HXBE6Rl0vG5P/pjDxllQwFUXvzGX9MOXfKackClQOS6gKVPeTFg djx6wem+BsmsVG4T85g0BYOA33lzGYeOiERXJMhPqJJcv3dPiA4I4LARCphSZ7wsJQRVCH8zs xfpMD1cB1mxQ7RZGbvu+//K95QYAcZdnmS3MKsNQ0UifC7++o7E3n2jNndX4UVuxDcHDvCXGb RD2oXVa5CnWE7myQmUYw==
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Unicode in xml2rfc v3
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Am 18.12.2020 um 00:57 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
> On 2020-12-17, at 22:28, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> RFC 7997 opened the door, but not very wide. In earlier days ASCII was enforced.
>
> A very typical mistake.
>
> When some direction of travel is controversial, there is a tendency to make “compromises”.  This can have the effect that all the costs of taking that direction accrue (because they are not actually influenced by the compromise), but the benefits are artificially limited.
> ...

On the other hand, the idea was to publish "snapshots" of the drafts we
were developing, and to revise them as we gain experience. That part of
the plan has failed completely (we're now over four years after approval).

Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email