At 08:35 AM 2/20/98 -0500, John Pawling wrote:
The part of Paul's proposal that I question is the inclusion of languageTag
in ESSFreeText. I would like to avoid forcing the receiving software to
check for two sources of languageTags. It would be much cleaner if we could
always use embedded language tags in the UTF8String. I understand Paul's
concern that the concept of embedding language tags in UTF-8 strings is
immature. However, if we believe that the concept will be nailed down in
the next few weeks, then I believe that it is worth the risk to simply use
UTF8String. If embedded language tags is a risky concept that may get
thrown out altogether, then I believe that we should stick with Paul's
proposal.
Drat. I seem to be in the minority here in my worry that the IETF won't get
language tags in UTF-8. I'm again assured they will, so I agree with John and
others to take out the optional language tag. My proposed privacy mark is now:
ESSPrivacyMark ::= CHOICE {
pString PrintableString (SIZE (1..ub-privacy-mark-length)),
utf8String UTF8String
}
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium