[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Re: Legacy charset conversion in draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt (in ksc5601-1987)
By "additions", i mean the required new tag for new version of legacy encoding, like "ks_c_5601-1992"
which should have been used, but never have been, as far as i know. Is there any central
registry that maintain the correct tag values for vaiour versions of numorous legacy encodings ??
If not, how to ensure stable and interoperable legacy-2-unicode conversion among myriads of applications ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Ewell" <email@example.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "James Seng" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] Re: Legacy charset conversion in draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt (in ksc5601-1987)
> Soobok Lee <lsb at postel3 dot postel dot co dot kr> wrote:
> > What if proper and stable implementation of legacy encodings in
> > IDNA is not a tangilbe object due to their frequent updates/
> > additions ?
> How "frequent" are updates to legacy encodings, or updates to the
> mapping tables between legacy encodings and Unicode?
> As for additions, they shouldn't cause a problem anyway, because they
> don't break existing legacy-to-Unicode mappings. An often-mentioned
> case of adding to a legacy encoding was when Microsoft retrofitted
> U+20AC EURO SIGN onto their Windows code pages (mostly at previously
> unassigned code position 0x80). The only people who suffered at all
> were the ones who thought "unassigned" somehow meant that they should
> map 0x80 to U+0080. Everyone else made it just fine.
> -Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
> (would prefer to receive only one copy of these messages)