Re: UTF-8 syntax

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Thu Dec 12 2002 - 09:38:38 CST


In <Pine.BSI.3.91.1021211092021.25474C-100000@spsystems.net> Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net> writes:

>However, my point remains: today's standard is RFC 2279, not Yergeau's
>draft. Whatever might happen to the draft, today's standard does include
>the 5- and 6-byte sequences, so pretending otherwise is inappropriate.

However, our draft does contain a pseudo-remark to the effect that we will
refer to RFC 2279bis if it has been accepted by the IETF by the time we
are ready.

>> What I propose is to leave the syntax as is, but I have added a final
>> sentence...
>> Is that acceptable to everybody?

>That looks okay to me.

It might be a good idea if RFC 2279bis contained a similar sentence. But
we can let François worry about that.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.