From: Erland Sommarskog (sommar@algonet.se)
Date: Thu Dec 28 2000 - 16:01:25 CST
Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk) writes:
> >> 4.4.2. Character Sets within Article Bodies
> >>
> >> Within article bodies, the CES and CCS implied by any Content-
> >> Transfer-Encoding and Content-Type headers [RFC 2045] SHOULD be
> >> applied by reading agents. In the absence of such headers, reading
> >> agents cannot be relied upon to display correctly more than the US-
> >> ASCII characters.
> >> [Observe that reading agents are not forbidden to "guess", or to
> >> interpret as UTF-8 regardless, which would be the simplest course for
> >> them to take.]
>
> >Great wording!
>
> Yes, but that wording is pseudo-comment, not intended for the final
> document. Do you want me to make it permanent? The "would" would become a
> MAY, of course.
My comment actaully referred to the text before the brackets. I'm aware
that the bracketed text is for internal use only.
But leaving it in - why not? But it would be a note, so MAY does seem
right, but "may" may be better than "would".
-- Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, sommar@algonet.se I'm not in love. It's not even a phase I'm going through.