[rfc-i] Use of unicode
"Martin J. Dürst"
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Mon Apr 23 20:48:52 PDT 2012
On 2012/04/24 7:00, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 4/23/12 3:17 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> I think that people would include both an ASCII (traditional) email
> address and a Unicode (EAI) email address.
I think so too. Same for names, unless they are just Latin with diacritics.
>> Even when all non 7-bit ASCII characters are summarily stripped from
>> an RFC it must be possible to implement that RFC.
So let's move 20 or 30 years back and say "even when all upper-case
characters are summarily stripped from an RFC it must be possible to
implement that RFC". How much sense does that make?
Do you assume that a reader would be aware of the fact that non-ASCII is
stripped? If yes, shouldn't they just go make sure they have the
> That's why I said we'd want to make sure that documents would include
> both the properly-encoded Unicode code points along with the actual code
> point numbers or names.
There are cases where having the codepoint numbers is very important.
The best example is syntactically/protocol-wise relevant characters. But
it's a bad idea as a general guideline. For example, it doesn't make
sense in author's names.
More information about the rfc-interest