[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Charset policy - Post Munich
- To: IETF Charsets <ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM>,Unicode Discussion <unicode@unicode.org>
- Subject: Re: Charset policy - Post Munich
- From: Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>
- Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 22:46:37 +0000 (GMT)
- Autoforwarded: false
- Disclose-recipients: prohibited
- Hop-count: 2
- Importance: normal
- In-reply-to: <c=US%a=_%p=JHUAPL%l=APLFS01-970901212723Z-5@aplfs01.jhuapl.edu>
- Priority: normal
- UA-content-id: 11B90DAE1C00
- X400-MTS-identifier: [;6737462201091997/A14971/REDMS1]
Ed Hart responded privately but I trust he won't object to my forwarding his
response:
> From amendment 2: UCS Transformation format 8 (UTF-8)
>
> I'll see you on Wednesday afternoon.
>
> Best regards,
> Ed
>
> ----------
> From: Misha Wolf [SMTP:misha.wolf@reuters.com]
> Sent: 01 September, 1997 17:11
> To: Multiple Recipients of
> Subject: Re: Charset policy - Post Munich
>
> [I'm copying this mail to the unicode list. If any Unicoder responds,
> please copy your response to (ietf-charsets@innosoft.com).]
>
> A couple of minor comments:
>
> > (Note: ISO 10646 calls the UTF-8 CES a "Transfer Format" rather
> > than a "character encoding scheme", but it fits the charset report
> > definition of a character encoding scheme).
>
> As I'm on the road (actually at the Eleventh International Unicode
> Conference), I don't have access to the ISO 10646 amendments. I think
> that ISO 10646 calls UTF-8 a "Transformation Format", not a "Transfer
> Format". Can anyone check this? RFC 2130 contains many incorrect
> definitions including those of ASCII (!) and of UTF; please let's not
> add to them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
Reuters Ltd.