[rfc-i] [IAB Trac] #269: Discussion of UTF-8 in RFCs (Section 3.3)
dthaler at microsoft.com
Wed Feb 27 14:28:36 PST 2013
Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 2/28/13 1:39 AM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
> > On 2/26/13 11:52 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >> 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.
> > Correct.
> >> I'm not trying to be clever here; I am genuinely unsure what your
> >> text means to me as an author or reviewer.
> > This is the same type of judgement call made on a regular basis when
> > it comes to deciding things like references. I expect most cases will
> > be obvious, and edge cases will need to be discussed, exactly as they
> > are today.
> While I think we need allow this, the subjective nature of the decision means
> that idnits can't be authoritative about it. It will probably need to flag most
> instances of UTF-8 as warnings, and in some documents there could be
> *many* of those. The only clean solution I see to that is to permit UTF-8
Some portions, like the page header, abstract, and references section could
be omitted from idnits checking for UTF-8.
For other sections which could have both normative and non-normative
content, I agree it would be good for idnits to generate warnings
(much as it does for certain classes of IP addresses whenever they're
used in a doc).
I disagree that permitting UTF-8 everywhere is "clean" :)
More information about the rfc-interest