RE: RFC 2279 (UTF-8) to Full Standard

[ned.freed@mrochek.com]

> François wrote:

> > Markus Scherer wrote:
> > > RFC 2279 still describes encodings for code points >U+10ffff.
> > > That should be removed.
> >
> > I'm not sure.  These code points ( >10FFFF) still exist, even though nobody
> > is ever going to allocate anything there.
> >
> > It could be argued that making this change is a major change and would
> > require recycling to Proposed Standard instead of going to Full Standard.
> > At present, I don't see any good reason to take that route.

> I agree, even though the Unicode Standard only describes UTF-8
> out to U+10FFFF. 10646 still gives the full scheme to U-7FFFFFFF,
> and it will be awhile (if ever) before we can change that to
> deprecate all the 5- and 6-byte values. So I see no good reason
> right now to put RFC 2279 out of synch with 10646, particularly
> if it would slow down a revision of RFC 2279 now.

I don't particularly care about this either way, but I do note that it is
always acceptable to remove some feature from a standard and that doing so in
no way impedes it ability to advance in status. Only the addition of a feature
triggers a recycle to proposed.

				Ned