Re: 10646, and all that

> Or, are you saying that the following specification:
>
>       Content-type: text/plain; charset=ASCII
>       Content-language: French
>
> is better than:
>
>       Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO646-FR
Yes!  Actually I prefer a language= parameter, but I definitely want
to separate the language specification from the character set.

MIME character set names are just strings to be matched against a mail 
reader's character set repertoire -- they weren't designed to be
taken apart and analyzed.

If the language is combined with a charset, then a decent mail reader has to
support LOTS of charsets.  Especially when you start listing combinations of
languages -- say, to indicate a mixed English/Japanese text.

If language is a parameter to content-type, then a mail reader can display
the message (perhaps sub-optimally) if it knows the character set.  If it's
smart enough to take the language parameter into account, the mail reader
can pick a font that is tuned to that language.

Furthermore, separating the language parameter from the charset makes it
easier to do multilingual text using a construct similar to
multipart/alternative -- the mail reader can let the user choose to read the
French rather than the Spanish version of the text.  Such a choice should be
based on the language the text was written in, not the character set.  The
reader doesn't really care about the character set, as long as her mail
reader supports it.

Keith