On Nov 30, 2005, at 12:41 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Robert Sayre wrote:
I'm sure someone has already suggested this approach,
but I'll add my voice to the chorus.
I really don't like this approach for various reasons.
Rather than opening RFCs to text utilizing any character-set
anywhere, as this draft suggests, there could be alternative UTF
fields for an author's name and reference titles, and perhaps defined
characters for simple line and table drawing that invoke automatic
translation when an ASCII text version is generated. Being able to
review the ID as it would appear as an RFC would also seem to be a
requirement. It seems problematic for protocol examples to use non-
ASCII characters owing to there not being ubiquitously displayable
Ietf mailing list