[rfc-i] Problems and requirements for RFC Format
"Martin J. Dürst"
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Sun Apr 22 23:49:30 PDT 2012
On 2012/04/18 15:01, Joe Touch wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2012, at 6:53 PM, "Martin J. Dürst"<duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:
>> On 2012/04/18 7:01, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> (at all phases) "Ability to denote protocol examples using the character
>>> sets those examples support". This is a variant of "Respect for authors'
>>> names", but is more technically-oriented.
>> Yes, non-ASCII in examples is very helpful in some cases. However, the wording above may be confusing, because "character set" is sometimes (e.g. in MIME) used to stand for character encoding.
> I used that term to match what we use for various protocols.
But the problem is that it's used in a different meaning than in the
>> What about the following wording:
>> "Need to be able to use non-ASCII characters in author's names and in examples."
> I left the two issues separate - and think they should remain so.
> Non-ASCII for author names is distinct from on-ASCII for examples.
Separating is fine, but may look a bit boring:
"Need to be able to use non-ASCII characters in authors' names."
"Need to be able to use non-ASCII characters in examples."
[Note that I also fixed the position of the apostrophe in "authors'".]
More information about the rfc-interest