[rfc-i] Pagination requirements
ynir at checkpoint.com
Wed May 16 01:07:32 PDT 2012
On May 16, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Martin Rex wrote:
>>>> Yes, more and more specifications in the Apps Area, RAI Area, and even
>>>> Security Area need to say something about internationalization. They
>>>> don't all need to include non-ASCII characters, but for those that do
>>>> this issue needs to be addressed.
>>> I'm pretty sure that there are less than 1 in 200 RFCs where this
>>> would make sense at all.
>> The fact that author names also may contain non-ASCII characters would
>> significantly change this percentage.
> That is a completely silly argument.
> In order to ensure that author names on english language standards
> can be inserted, printed, read, and typed into english language
> references of that document, supplying the author name in ASCII letters
> is imperative. Using a representation that 90% of the worlds population
> would not be able to (a) recognize and (b) type on their keyboard when
> being handed a hardcopy printout is entirely useless (for the purpose
> of a standard).
That I agree with. We have people with English names and some lucky Europeans (like you) and speakers of European languages whose names can be rendered by ASCII characters. Then we have people like me, whose name doesn't even come close to be renderable in ASCII. Y-o-a-v is a compromise between getting English speakers to pronounce it as close as possible to the way it should and shortness. If a draft I write had יואב ניר in the header, it would be meaningful to very few people. People with Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Russian, Arabic or Hebrew names don't expect to render their names on RFCs with their native code points.
So what's left? People with European names that can almost be rendered by ASCII, except for some umlaut or accent. While my email client (and browser) show the umlaut in Martin's name, writing one myself is difficult, and I don't see the point in supporting this. I do, however, believe that there are good use cases for the content to contain non-ASCII characters, and that is a good reason to add it.
More information about the rfc-interest