ietf-openpgp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: What's left before a new RFC?

2002-04-18 12:50:36


From: John Dlugosz

Ah, excellent point.

So if you wanted to include something funny in the version or comment, you
could use something like HTML escapes.  That would be clear to the human
reader, but still pacify the person who really really wants to spell his
name correctly.





Marc Mutz <mutz(_at_)kde(_dot_)org>@mail.imc.org on 04-18-2002 05:48:57 AM

Sent by:  owner-ietf-openpgp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org


To:   Marcel Waldvogel <marcel(_at_)news(_dot_)m(_dot_)wanda(_dot_)ch>, Jon 
Callas
      <jon(_at_)callas(_dot_)org>
cc:   ietf-openpgp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject:  Re: What's left before a new RFC?



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 18 April 2002 10:17, Marcel Waldvogel wrote:
<snip>
For the Version and Comment headers, I propose to state that they are
UTF-8, but for interoperability, implementations SHOULD restrict
themselves to generate ASCII characters.
<snip>

I don't see the how having UTF-8 inside _ASCII_ Armor can be justified. The
problem is that the ascii armor is going to be used in non-8but-clean
environments. Else, you'd use the binary format, no?

Because of that, I'm strongly in favour of stating that implementations
MUST
NOT emit armor headers with non-US-ACSII characters in them.

Re: UTF-7. I understand that UTF-7 could be a solution. Only UTF-7 is
widely
considered to be a big mistake, so it shouldn't be used anymore.

Marc

- --
Marc Mutz <mutz(_at_)kde(_dot_)org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8vqSZ3oWD+L2/6DgRAvUFAJ9BG1s0Z8j+Ylmb17IpK/r7BsQE9ACfcJdz
kBG5Od9TA9P84a7Qnh+NMdk=
=TFvG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>