[rfc-i] Pagination requirements
stpeter at stpeter.im
Wed May 16 05:47:25 PDT 2012
On 5/16/12 5:10 AM, Martin Rex wrote:
> Joe Hildebrand wrote:
>> "Martin Rex" <mrex at sap.com> wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure that there are less than 1 in 200 RFCs where this
>>> would make sense at all.
>> If this feature isn't important to you, don't use it. But
>> please don't get in the way of other people trying to do good work just
>> because you work at a layer of the stack that you think non-English-speakers
>> never see.
> non-English-speakers (more accurately non-English-readers) or folks with
> difficulties in recognizing or distinguishing latin letters are *NOT*
> (and likely will never be) the target audience of IETF RFCs,
No one ever said they were.
The point that you have so far failed to grasp, or that we have so far
failed to communicate, is that the ability to include Unicode code
points from outside the US-ASCII range in (some of) our specifications
is important for communication with readers of English about technical
topics related to the inclusion of such code points in Internet
protocols. Examples include Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs),
Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs), current work on Email
Address Internationalization (EAI WG) and Preparation and Comparison of
Internationalized Strings (PRECIS WG), along with specifications that
re-use those technologies. We can include those code points in messages
sent to our email discussion lists and jabber chat rooms, in slides
presented at IETF meetings, in physical handouts at tutorials, etc. The
only place we can't include them is our specifications. Whether or not
you think that matters, it matters a great deal to those of us who are
laboring to build support for non-ASCII code points into the full range
of Internet protocols.
More information about the rfc-interest