[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 mailing list