IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Thu, 11 March 2010 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35EE23A6958 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:23:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.016
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.016 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YHvo04a-v0XC for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:23:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CABD73A695D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:22:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 36550 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2010 23:29:46 -0000
Received: from softbank219001188004.bbtec.net (HELO necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp) (219.1.188.4) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 11 Mar 2010 23:29:46 -0000
Message-ID: <4B996D01.4030208@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:21:53 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja-JP; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: ja, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tbray@textuality.com
Subject: Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII
References: <000001cac135$c89bc680$59d35380$@us> <201003111654.o2BGsLPs022287@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp> <517bf111003110925o768ca410oe7bc09cc7218e811@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <517bf111003110925o768ca410oe7bc09cc7218e811@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:23:14 -0000

Tim Bray wrote:

>>The existing plaintext ASCII format is easy and univerval. ?Any more
>>fancy document formats come with plenty of problems and infinitesimal
>>close to zero benefit.

> AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGH!!!!

Can't you notice fancy tool of you have wrongly translated a
character in "univerval. ?Any" of quoted message, even though
the original message by Martin Rex is pure ASCII.

That is, two consequetive space characters "  " before "Any" is
translated to a space character and something else, which is not
legible to me.

> Oh, except for this data point. I have offered, and now repeat the
> offer: At the point the IETF decides to improve the
> internationalization, usability, accessibility, and longevity of its
> specification format by recognizing some of the progress of the last
> thirty years, I will commit to offering some cycles to help with tools
> and specs, as appropriate.

No thanks.

You have successfully demostrated that, beyond ASCII, even the
simplest character handling is impossible.

Before saying something about long history of confusions and frauds
on  internationalization, please don't convert someone else's pure
ASCII message into something else.

							Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email