From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Tue Feb 11 2003 - 08:09:16 CST
Sam Roberts wrote:
> Quoteing blilly@erols.com, on Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 05:39:26PM -0500:
>
>>>Yawn! The draft does not require, or even allow, raw UTF-8 to be passed to
>>>moderators. If you think it does, then please put up or shut up.
>>
>>The draft permits a UA to generate raw utf-8. That is then passed to
>>an injection agent, which determines that one or more newsgroups are
>>moderated. Existing injection agents do not transform raw-utf-8,
>>and no existing or future injection agent can transform any untagged
>>8-bit content without charset and language information.
>
>
> Why not?
>
> The charset seems clearly to be utf-8!
No, in fact Usenet (and mail) abounds with a large variety
of untagged 8-bit charsets.
> And a langugae tag is only allowed for paramaters, and even there is
> optional, is it not?
No, language-tagging is provided by MIME for RFC 2047
encoded-words also. See RFC 2231 and the errata page at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.html. Along with the
Content-Language field for body text, MIME provides full
compliance with RFCs 1958 and 2277 for internationalization
including language-tagging. And 2277 is quite clear that
there must be provision for language-tagging if the *user*
chooses to tag text; it is not acceptable for software to
drop language information if supplied by the user. The
"optional" part is for user discretion, not for lazy
programmers.