Isn't this why we have the weasel language about ISO-2022 not being well
enough defined in the RFC?
How about if we said, in the RFC, that "charset=iso-2022" MEANS that it
is in US-ASCII but might have ISO 2022 escapes. Is that reasonable?
Basically, the whole point for having the ISO-2022 charset in the RFC,
as I see it, is to satisfy the existing Japanese/Asian usage base.
Can't we just come up with a thing to call it and a definition that
matches that usage, rather than complicating matters with unnecessary
(and undesirable, given the desire to miminize the number of charsets in
use) complication?
----- End Included Message -----