In other words, Keld, I am being so persistent because this topic continues
to be off the working group's primary topic. That doesn't make it an
unimportant topic. Just one that is being conducted in the wrong
place. Note, for example, the general lack of progress in 2 years.
If you were a working group, you would have to specify some goals to
achieve and some milestones for achieving them.
This I agree with 100%. I've been ignoring the character set debates
since they're not terribly interesting to me. I appreciate that there's
people who can get excited about such things, and it would be nice if
they did `elsewhere' ;-) (so long as it *should* be done elsewhere....).
There's no doubt it's an important issue. I have some doubt as to whether
it's an issue to other protocols except that ...
FTP has strings it transports from server -> user
TELNET has some similar needs
IDENTIFICATION PROTOCOL (RFC-1413) identifies character set
names in it.
So there may well be needs in other protocols.
Of course if everything were encoded in something like XDR or ASN.1 ...
<- David Herron <david(_at_)twg(_dot_)com> (work)
<david(_at_)davids(_dot_)mmdf(_dot_)com> (home)
<-
<- "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change
them."
<- Karen Hargrove of Microsoft quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial.