Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:55:46 +0200
Bjoern Hoehrmann <[email protected]> wrote:

> UTF-8 everywhere is a reasonable principle and much simpler to
> understand and implement than any means to specify use of legacy
> encoding schemes. 

UTF-8 has its own technical problems (the Unicode signature, representation 
of non-BMP characters, etc.).  Moreover, people do not throw away legacy 
encodings but stick to them.  For example, although I think that 
Unicode is better than Shift-JIS and I do have Unicode-aware text editors, I 
still use Shift-JIS, which is so convenient at present.

I am not saying UTF-8 is bad.  I'm just saying UTF-8 everywhere is even 
more unrealistic than any other options at hand.

>For inbound encoding declarations, generic syntax
> does not work. Whatever syntax you choose, it will look odd in many
> formats and many authors won't use it anyway.

Please see my mail to Martin.

Cheers,

-- 
MURATA Makoto <[email protected]>