[rfc-i] Data point [Re: Fwd:I-D ACTION:draft-hoffman-utf8-rfcs-03.txt]

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Oct 7 09:47:01 PDT 2008


Joe Touch wrote:
> ...
>> The traditional fixed-format ASCII provides high utility for... um,
>> who was that again?
> 
> It's archival. As in "in 40 years we will still be able to read and
> print it". We don't have that info for HTML.
> ...

Well. If in 40 years from now, we can't read HTML 4.01 anymore, we are 
really in serious trouble.

>> Anyhow, at the moment all we're arguing about is including non-ASCII
>> characters in a few highly constrained places without abandoning the
>> traditional format.
> 
> My point is that UTF-8 does not achieve that goal; by allowing non-ASCII
> in names and addresses, it destroys the current page boundary marker,
> and does not appear to provide an alternative.
> ...

Not allowing form feed IMHO was an oversight.

Can we assume it will be allowed, and continue the discussion based on that?

BR, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list