[rfc-i] draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sun Feb 28 10:35:30 PST 2016


<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.abstract>:

"This document updates RFC 7322. ..."

...but doesn't so in the op block.

"... Please review the PDF version of this draft."

I'd move that into a separate note; it doesn't belong into the abstract.


<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.1.p.2>:

"For much of the history of the RFC Series, the character encoding used 
for RFCs has been ASCII [ANSI.X3-4.1986].  ..."

I believe the now preferred reference is RFC 20.

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.1.p.6>:

"... Other implementers must not expect those changes to remain 
backwards-compatible with the details described this document."

...described *in* this document.

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.2>:

"Searches against RFC indexes and database tables need to return 
expected results and support appropriate Unicode string matching behaviors;"

It's not clear what that means, in particular unless we define expected 
results.

"People whose system does not have the fonts needed to display a 
particular RFC need to be able to read the various publication formats 
and the XML correctly in order to understand and implement the 
information described in the document."

Maybe "will have to read alternative publication formats"?

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.3>:

"This section describes the guidelines for the use of non-ASCII 
characters in the header, body, and reference sections of an RFC."

Are there other sections? What about the index, for instance?

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.3.1.p.3>:

"Example of non-ASCII characters that do not require escaping [RFC4475]:"

It would be good to concretely reference the relevant part of RFC 4475, 
and to state how the example below differs from it.

Such as: "Example of non-ASCII characters that do not require escaping 
(the example from Section 3.1.1.12 of [RFC4475], with a hex dump 
replaced by the actual character glyphs):"

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.3.2.p.1>:

"Person names may appear in several places within an RFC. In all cases, 
valid Unicode is required."

What is the definition of "valid" Unicode? And doesn't it apply to all 
of the document, thus would be better called out once for all in the 
beginning?

"For names that include characters outside of the Unicode Latin and 
Latin Extended script, an author-provided, ASCII-only identifier is 
required to assist in search and indexing of the document."

It would be good to be more precise about what non-ASCII characters are 
allowed (range?).

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.3.4.p.12>:

"BCP 137, "ASCII Escaping of Unicode Character" describes the pros and 
cons of different options for identifying Unicode characters in an ASCII 
document BCP137 [RFC5137]."

So why do we cite [RFC5137]? Shouldn't his be [BCP137]?

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.3.5.p.1>:

"Tables follow the same rules for identifiers and characters as in 
"Section 3.4. Body of the document"."

(this intra-document link should be an <xref> in the XML source)

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00.html#rfc.section.3.8.p.1>:

"Keywords and citation tags must be ASCII only."

What does "Keywords" refer to? The things we put into the xml2rfc 
<keyword> element?

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list