[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: General policy
- To: luc@opus.spc.nl
- Subject: RE: General policy
- From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald.t.alvestrand@delab.sintef.no>
- Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 10:26:19 +0200
- Cc: ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM
- Resent-message-id: <01H1AI6U1NWY984OTM@INNOSOFT.COM>
- X400-Content-type: P2-1984 (2)
- X400-MTS-identifier: [/PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/;930803102619]
- X400-Originator: harald.t.alvestrand@delab.sintef.no
- X400-Received: by mta aun.uninett.no in /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed;Tue, 3 Aug 1993 10:47:37 +0200
- X400-Received: by /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed; Tue,3 Aug 1993 10:26:20 +0200
- X400-Received: by /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed; Tue,3 Aug 1993 10:26:19 +0200
- X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
When talking about labelling, I was thinking of mechanisms outside
the bytestream itself, unlike ISO 2022.
That means that when you start the bytestream, you expect to see one
character set/encoding method, and when you go to the middle of the bytestream,
you still expect to see the same charset/method.
The MIME "charset=" construct is the paramount example of such a labelling.
It could probably be easily added as part of TELNET negotiation, and so on
for other protocols.
Harald A