Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047 (Re: Call for Usefor to recharter)

[Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 14 Jan 2003 23:13:19 -0000
"D. J. Bernstein" <djb@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> Keith Moore writes:
> > there will still be a need for canonicalization of certain fields
> 
> No. All text is already, at a minimum, C-normalized. Keyboard interfaces
> get it right, and other programs don't randomly switch accent positions.

I don't share your confidence that this happens in every environment,
for every program that generates header fields.

> Anyway, your hypothetical Unicode normalization problems would also
> arise in normalizing RFC 2047, so you can't use normalization as an
> argument against moving to UTF-8.

Which is precisely why 2047 was never intended for anything that needs
to be interpreted by machine.

> Your ``sufficient testing through ordinary usage'' argument is equally
> silly. Testing UTF-8 is much simpler than testing RFC 2047.

Your comparison is silly, because the two solve different problems;
and because for better or worse, the complexity associated with 2047
is going to be around for a long time anyway.

Keith