Re: utf8/legacy versioning

Thanks for your correction. UTF-8 (not utf8) is in that list.

But, UTF-8 is a character encoding form of UCS and does not specify the specific set of supported characters 
in the numerous versions of UCS.   That is the point where utf-8 and iso8859-1/ksc_5601_1987 differ.
I.e., UTF-8 defines encoding schemes over UCS which has been an open set and will remains as an open set.

UTF-8 , from its definition, cannot have versioing suffices, like "utf-8-3.2" or "utf-8-3.1".
That's why "utf-8" should not be regardsed as a "genuine" charset, IMO.

Correct me if i am wrong at some points. Thanks.

Soobok Lee

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Hoffman / IMC" <[email protected]>
To: "Soobok Lee" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] utf8/legacy versioning


> At 10:11 AM +0900 6/3/02, Soobok Lee wrote:
> >Moreover, It does not have "utf8" charset entry, because "utf8" is 
> >just one of the encodings of the Universal
> >Character Set, not an independent charset plus encoding like "ks_c_5601-1987".
> 
> Both your statement and your reasoning are wrong. UTF-8 has been a 
> registered charset since RFC 2279 was issued.
> 
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --Internet Mail Consortium