[rfc-i] UTF-8 and Unicode examples

Alex Rousskov rousskov at measurement-factory.com
Tue May 4 12:38:22 PDT 2004

On Tue, 4 May 2004, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:

> Given that the Unicode spec suggests the <> format, it would need a
> stronger case, in my view, to choose another rendering.

I did not realize Unicode spec suggests the <> format. You have a much
stronger point then.

> > Should tools like xml2rfc accept/interpret raw UTF-8, the escape
> > sequence above, or both? This matters because these tools produce
> > both ASCII text and HTML versions of specs.
> I would not want to derail the short-term need to be able to express
> Unicode and UTF-8 examples by commingling it with the much bigger
> long-term problem as to whether non-ASCII characters should be
> first-class RFC citizens. There are many reasons that this may not be a
> good idea, none of which affect the issue of expressing protocol
> examples I'm concerned about here.

I agree. The above questions have little to do with that bigger issue.
We simply need to decide what the right behavior for dual-output tools
such as xml2rfc is. The short-term choices do not include using UTF-8
characters in TXT output but may include using UTF-8 characters in
HTML output and in input.



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list