At 6:27 PM 12/9/94, Satoshi Kinoshita wrote:
So your interpretation of rfc822 seems to be something like this:
iso-2022-jp is not conformant to rfc822 because it's not strictly ASCII.
If it's right,
Q encoded iso-8859-1 is also not conformant because of the same reason.
This is correct.
Interpretation of rfc822 should not depend on the existence of charset label.
Interpretation of rfc822 does not depend on charset labels. Charset labels
are not within the domain of discourse for rfc822.
I think this kind of interpretation is not good for both
iso-2022-* and MIME charset labeling.
A little smoother and reasonable consensus of rfc822 is necessary
so that we can use iso-2022-* or B and Q encoding as a valid body of rfc822.
Satoshi, the interpretation of rfc822 is not the issue, at least, it
should not be. This debate is about how to signal the interpretation of
character strings which are not intended to be interpreted as what has been
defined as us-ascii in the MIME rfc. I believe it is the consensus of the
working group that the best way to signal the proper interpretation is with
a charset label. The mechanics of the label is also part of the MIME rfc.
john noerenberg [in San Jose for IETF]
jwn2(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com
noerenberg.j (Applelink)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't it always seem to go,
That you don't know what you got til it's gone
Joni Mitchell, "Big Yellow Taxi", 1969
----------------------------------------------------------------------