Re: [xml2rfc] [irsg] character sets, was UPDATE regarding <u>

Carsten Bormann <> Fri, 10 March 2023 10:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 618EDC1BE876 for <>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 02:07:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QmOt_bDOCdD3 for <>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 02:07:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7CA3C1516EB for <>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 02:06:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4PY1tT5sgHzDCbt; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 11:06:57 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
From: Carsten Bormann <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 11:06:57 +0100
Cc: "John R. Levine" <>,
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 700135617.084156-1037f1b3074b811e39c9879665824e71
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <20230304041905.DA71BA438468@ary.qy> <> <> <> <>
To: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] [irsg] character sets, was UPDATE regarding <u>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: XML2RFC discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:07:02 -0000

On 2023-03-10, at 10:56, Martin J. Dürst <> wrote:
> Please make the warnings say this in a positive way. We don't want people to fall back on Latin or ASCII just because they got scared by a warning.

That is a good point indeed.  I haven’t designed that part yet; it would only be triggered if there are actual declarations of intent in the source.

> Declaring the characters involved should work for most scripts, but for Arabic and most Indic scripts at least, that's not enough, because you need the right contextual forms in the font.

Right.  I was assuming that we put a character into the repertoire if we have all glyphs needed for that character.

> Also, for Chinese/Japanese(/Korean), you should know which it is (including the distinction between traditional and simplified Chinese) in order to select the right font. (Getting the wrong font will be legible, but will not look good enough for an RFC.)

This is a good point.  I’m not sure how to indicate language tag information in RFCXML today.

Grüße, Carsten