[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on draft-yergeau-rfc2279bis-00.txt
- To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Subject: Re: Comments on draft-yergeau-rfc2279bis-00.txt
- From: simon+ietf-charsets@josefsson.org
- Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:29:44 +0200
- Cc: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>,'Francois Yergeau' <FYergeau@alis.com>, ietf-charsets@iana.org
- In-reply-to: <4.2.0.58.J.20021005105052.04216378@localhost>
- Original-recipient: rfc822;ned+ietf-charsets@mrochek.com
- References: <4.2.0.58.J.20021005105052.04216378@localhost>
- Spam-test: False ; -2.9 / 5.2
- User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/21.2 (i386-debian-linux-gnu)
Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org> writes:
> Hello Ira,
>
> My understanding of rfc 2640 is that it uses utf-8 for file/path
> names, and for language-negotiated messages, but not for the encoding
> of the actual file contents. This is what was discussed when work
> on this rfc (to which I contributed) was going on, but can also
> be read from the snippets of text extracted below (you won't find
> any corresponding text for file contents).
The current FTP extension draft support charset tagging when
downloading (via "charset" MLST data), see the FTPEXT WG. Charset
tagging when uploading is not supported at all, as far as I can
understand. This is what I meant with partial support for charset
tagging in FTP in my earlier mail.