[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16

To: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
Subject: Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16
From: Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@INNOSOFT.COM>
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: Dan Kegel <dank@alumni.caltech.edu>,MURATA Makoto <murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp>,"Martin J. Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>, ietf-charsets@ISI.EDU,murata@fxis.fujixerox.co.jp, Tatsuo_Kobayashi@justsystem.co.jp
In-reply-to: <3565B02A.2BAD4D0D@netscape.com>

On Fri, 22 May 1998, Erik van der Poel wrote:
> Just a couple of minor points:
> 
> We should *prohibit* sending out little-endian when the charset label says
> "utf-16". The little endian folks are welcome to register their own charset
> name if they wish to do so.

I concur with this opinion.

I don't want to see a repeat of the TIFF mess where there are two
incompatible endian variants and interoperability problems plus inferior
user interfaces result.  "Avoid alternate representations" is a good
design principle to follow (see draft-newman-protocol-design-01.txt).

		- Chris

References:
- Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16
  - From: erik@netscape.com (Erik van der Poel)

Prev by Date: Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16
Next by Date: Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16
Prev by thread: Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16
Next by thread: Re: Revised proposal for UTF-16
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread