At 03:41 26/12/2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: "So there are
only two real choices for charset left: ASCII and Unicode."
This is a layer violation. Or this is internationalised-US-ASCII (to
remove the barriers between ASCII and foreign customers). These
barriers result from experienced needs. You may want to remove them
at your own US-ASCII risk. But you cannot impose your solution to
cross-foreign relations. Saying that your mission is to influence
people to accept it (RFC 3935) will not help you.
The time of the car of any colour you want if it is English, is over.
US-ASCII English protocols, documents and culture have helped a time
to develop the technology in an US-ASCII English environment. They
are now are a problem. Unless they are a default and an example to
build equivalent opportunities for every other language. Or unless
the technology is to stay US-ASCII English centric for ever.
Otherwise there is only one choice: the user keyboard. The master is
the user not the developer of the machine he uses.
There is certainly a developer, manufacturer, salesman need for
common simplification, to better support the user diversity. Unicode
is one of them. But you have to be careful that the "simplification"
does not increase the total complexity and hurt your market.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf