Subject: Re: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-jseng-idn-admin-01.txt

From: Kenneth Whistler <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 18:12:25 -0700 (PDT)

> Tuesday, October 22, 2002, 10:55:08 AM, you wrote:
> Mark> Would there be any way to get the policy on the format of internet 
drafts to
> Mark> be amended to allow UTF-8? It is pretty painful trying to read documents
> Mark> when the actual characters cannot be used.
> 
> It has always been difficult to be limited to ascii data.  And the problem
> is discussed every few years.
> 
> What open standard, for representing non-ascii data, would you recommend?
>

I thought it was obvious that he was recommending UTF-8.
Or if you prefer:

RFC 2279 (or the follow-on of that that François Yergeau is working on)
which is presumably what the other IETF recommendations about
use of UTF-8 in protocols is based on...

or

ISO/IEC 10646-1:2000 and ISO/IEC 10646-2:2001

or

The Unicode Standard, Version 3.2

--Ken

---

From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 19:02:01 -0700

Wait, wait! This is the *wrong place* for this debate.

The IETF has fixed guidelines for submitting Internet Drafts. We 
cannot change those guidelines in the IDN WG.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:17:57 -0700

I didn't say the *IDN WG* itself could change that. What I said was
"Would there be any way to get the policy on the format of internet
drafts to be amended to allow UTF-8? It is pretty painful trying to
read documents when the actual characters cannot be used."

I have no idea what the process that the Powers That Be have for
deciding the formats for internet drafts. I simply hope that that
policy gets changed, since it has gotten to the point that anyone who
wants to can read and write UTF-8 documents; various tools to do so
are free and easily available.

Mark
__________
http://www.macchiato.com
◄  “Eppur si muove” ►

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Hoffman / IMC" <[email-masked]>
To: "Kenneth Whistler" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; "Mark
Davis" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 19:02
Subject: Re: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-jseng-idn-admin-01.txt

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:07:28 +0900

Hello Paul,

Can you (or somebody else) tell us where the right place is?

Also, it seems that this WG has a much clearer need than many/
most WGs on this issue, and so it may be helpful to document
that need clearly enough as a need of the WG, rather than as
an idea of some individuals.

Regards,    Martin.

At 19:02 02/10/22 -0700, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>The IETF has fixed guidelines for submitting Internet Drafts. We cannot 
>change those guidelines in the IDN WG.
>
>--Paul Hoffman, Director

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:04:58 +0900

I have to fully agree with Mark. Getting the policy changed would
be great. For James' document, the us-ascii version is just a bunch
of numbers. No help to those who
don't know Chinese characters, and no help to those who do. Just
a waste of bits and paper, even if the topic may be
important and interesting.

I also was asked to put a lot of examples into draft-duerst-iri.
Very tough indeed, because these would have to be non-ASCII examples.

I think as a first step, the IETF should start to accept drafts
in parallel in US-ASCII and UTF-8 (the later with an extension of
.tx8 or so). I'm very sure both Mark and me would be ready to help
the IETF and the secretariat to get there.

I also had some discussions with Marshal Rose in Yokohama to
extend the XML2RFC format a bit so that 'the right thing' would
happen for both versions. We didn't get very far yet, but
should pick it up again.

Regards,    Martin.

At 21:17 02/10/22 -0700, Mark Davis wrote:
>$Bcw("(B $Bc`W&(Bppur si muove$Bc`Ycv%3(B
>

---

From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 08:15:14 -0800

>Can you (or somebody else) tell us where the right place is?

The right place should be [email-masked]. I say "should" because that 
is the proper forum, not because I am suggesting that you take this 
debate there. It has been discussed repeatedly there, with no 
resolution. You could bring it there, of course; if you do, it would 
be polite if you read the archives first. Note that being polite is 
at all a proven requirement for the IETF discussion list...

>most WGs on this issue,

It is, as far as I can tell, the *only* WG that has any need. The 
other value of UTF-8 Internet Drafts is that document authors can 
spell their names correctly. (For those not following closely, Martin 
actually does not have a "ue" in his last name, and Patrik actually 
does not have either an "a" or an "o" in his last name.)

>  and so it may be helpful to document

Well, you have to define "need". It might be difficult to do 
U+xxxx-to-visual mapping for the draft in question, but is that 
really a "need"? It is rude for you and Patrik and many others to 
have to misspell your name in the documents you write, but is that 
really a "need"? Needs and desires are quite different things.

My suggestion is that you simply write up a carefully-scoped Internet 
Draft on the topic and submit it. Be sure to have a mailing list for 
the draft, and be sure to invite at least a few ADs to the list early 
on. Starting a "discussion" on the IETF mailing list is 99.9% assured 
to go nowhere without an Internet Draft behind it. With an Internet 
Draft, you have a greater chance of success.

--Paul Hoffman, Director