Re: URL internationalization!

Masataka -

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, you wrote:

> Yergeau;

Didn't I tell you that this is his last name, you it would be
"Mr. Yergeau"? Do you actually read mail?


> No. The ovbious answer is for the client to use ISO 2022 based
> encoding assuming G0 designation of ASCII only.
> 
> The encoding is compatible (automatically distinguishable with 100%
> certainity) with all the existing ones, including SJIS, EUC (of any
> sort including ISO-8859-*), BIG5, GBK, and even the infamous UTFs
> so that servers can automatically detect badly-behaving clients
> and, then, guess the encoding.

That would be one possible answer, but not a very obvious one,
and one with important shortcommings:

- ISO 2022 allows virtually dozens of ways to encode most characters.
	I have already mentionned this.
- This would require servers to understand all the many "codepages"
	registered (currently close to 200).
- ISO 2022 is notoriously complex. It's a box of building
	blocks which require careful tailoring before use. Specs
	defining encodings based on ISO 2022 are regularly more
	complex than e.g. UTF-8. Just compare some of the RFCs
	you have cited in an earlier mail with RFC 2044.


Regards,	Martin.