B. 8: Incomplete "character sets" -- How to handle 2022, 10646, MNEMONIC
AUTHORS' POSTION: Do NOT try to define these in the document. Don't even
give placeholder names for them. Suggest that future documents may define a
way to express the use of 10646 or MNEMOMIC as a character set, or something
like "ISO-2022-jpn-7" as a text subtype. (Fallback: if an expert (MRC?) can
provide the right prose, we could define the 2022 stuff here.)
My comment to this is that mnemonic is well specified in the RFC-MNEM
and RFC-CHAR documents.
European organisations such as NETF and EUnet has said that they want
support for this, and they even say that mnemonic is the preferred
plain text mail exchange format. So support for mnemonic should
be in all implementations of the new message interchange format.
I see that the current implementations of RFC-XXXX does not
contain support for mnemonic, which is contrary to what we want.
At least to me this means that mnemonic must be mandatory, and not
having the specification in RFC-XXXX is thus a SHOW STOPPER to me.