Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050510214414.02d7bce0@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 22:10:04 +0200
To: ned.freed@mrochek.com
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] RFC 2277 - considerations
In-Reply-To: <01LO3B1RSJSY00004T@mauve.mrochek.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050508032918.039af710@mail.jefsey.com>
	<6.0.0.20.2.20050508154021.06275280@itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp>
	<01LO1QSCZ7S800004T@mauve.mrochek.com>
	<6.2.1.2.2.20050509181241.048ab7f0@mail.jefsey.com>
	<01LO3B1RSJSY00004T@mauve.mrochek.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

On 20:26 10/05/2005, ned.freed@mrochek.com said:
>>Dear Ned,
>>I thank you to confirm the definition of the charset, as including two
>>information:
>>- coded character set: with the repertoire ISO 10646 as a default
>>- character encoding scheme: with UTF-8 as a default.
>>is a stable and well accepted matter.
>
>Your previous message quoted the definition of a charset. This isn't it.
>
>>This means that one can build from here.
>
>If by "build" you mean add script tags, the answer is no, you cannot.

Dear Fred,
I do not know you, so I can only try to guess what you mean by "no, you 
cannot".

- if you mean you technically cannot: the response is obviously yes I can, 
I did, I tested and it works well thank you.
- if you mean "I will not register them in the IANA", this is sad, I cannot 
do anything about it, except to forget about IANA in that part of generic 
CRCs development.
- if you mean that I miss some elements to do so. You are right (I 
documented that). But the advantages are so interesting that it is worth at 
this stage to go ahead. And I welcome every help.
- if you mean XML will not understand it. I agree, but it will not 
understand either (libraries) what the Draft or what the Draft after the 
Draft will chose to implement. We will do for XML what the XML people say, 
but for our applications we will do what is consistent with the Internet 
technology.

No worry here.

>>We will then have to use registered charsets UTF-8-XXX. It calls for a list
>>of registered charsets. But subtags will be necessary anyway for 3rd level
>>IDNs, to filter out the code points used for phishing. They will be used by
>>some applications.
>
>This is both unnecessary and unacceptable.

I am interested in why this would be unnecessary because this is what we 
are supposed to address. Letting know the receiving party what the content 
layout is.

Also to know what you mean by unacceptable: is that technical or because 
you would so decide?

>It also far exceeds the charter of this group and is therefore 
>inapppropriate even as a topic of discussion here.

I fully documented that it does not exceed (and even then?) the charter of 
this group which has to document why it wants to document what I (many 
will) consider to be a charset violation.

>And since this list is noisy enough while dealing with relevant matters, 
>this will be my final posting on this topic.

OK. No problem. But you obviously realise that all the issues which will 
have not been sorted out within this WG, will have to be addressed during 
the general Last Call. I have  no problem with that: I just want the final 
result not to create me more problem.

There are many people and applications around more happy with RFC 
2277/2301/3066 as they are (how imperfect they may be) than in seing them 
challenged and confused.

jfc










_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru