[rfc-i] [IAB Trac] #269: Discussion of UTF-8 in RFCs (Section 3.3)
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 23:52:08 PST 2013
A test case if I may. Is this normative or informative use of UTF-8?
"UTF-8 strings MUST be allowed (for example, 'smörgåsbord')."
The first half is clearly normative but the second half, IMHO, isn't.
I'm not trying to be clever here; I am genuinely unsure what your
text means to me as an author or reviewer.
On 26/02/2013 23:54, IAB issue tracker wrote:
> #269: Discussion of UTF-8 in RFCs (Section 3.3)
> Comment (by hlflanagan at gmail.com):
> I have revised the introductory text to section 3.3 to state:
> Some of the original requirements will be removed from consideration, but
> detailed rules regarding how these changes will be implemented will be
> documented in a future RFC.
> While I am leaving the retirement of ASCII as stated in section 3.3
> ("Limitation to 100% ASCII text ("The character codes are ASCII.")") I
> have also revised the text introducing UTF-8 as allowable in Section 3.2
> to be a bit more clear.
> New Section 3.2 text:
> The official language of the RFC Series is English. ASCII is required for
> all "normative" text, i.e., text that must be read to understand or
> implement the technology described in the RFC. UTF-8/Unicode text will be
> allowed for Author names and addresses and non-normative text within an
> RFC. Author names and addresses will require an ASCII equivalent for
> indexing purposes.
More information about the rfc-interest