In <20030207162534(_dot_)74654611(_dot_)moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
However I strongly disagree about the use of process. IESG should not
accept WG output that doesn't meet the quality required for
standardization (which includes breaking things).
Yes, but the proper way is for the WG to prepare its proposals and then to
discuss them with the IESG, usually via the Area Director in the first
instance.
That is now being done. Our chairman has made preliminary contact with the
AD, and we are now preparing a more detailed submission.
The burden on those who want to see raw utf-8 in message headers is to
convincingly demonstrate how to make it work well, without breaking the
installed base.
Yes, that is what we intend to demonstrate.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5
Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5