[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] =?UTF-8?B?UkU6IFtpZG5dIFJlOiBBbiBpZG4gcHJvdG9jb2wgZm9yIGNvbnNp?= =?UTF-8?B?ZGVyYXRpb24gaW4gbWFraW5nIHRoZSByZXEgdWlyZW1lbnRz?=
- To: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Re: [idn] =?UTF-8?B?UkU6IFtpZG5dIFJlOiBBbiBpZG4gcHJvdG9jb2wgZm9yIGNvbnNp?= =?UTF-8?B?ZGVyYXRpb24gaW4gbWFraW5nIHRoZSByZXEgdWlyZW1lbnRz?=
- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 14:25:45 -0800
- Delivery-date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 14:25:15 -0800
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
At 01:06 PM 2/10/00 -0800, ned.freed@innosoft.com wrote:
>And if anything the problem since then has gotten larger and more
>entrenched. (If you don't believe this, consider the difficulty of upgrading a
>system where email handling is implemented on a chip. Such things already
>exist
>and are beginning to deploy -- see www.connectone.com for an example.
And another: iReady <http://www.iready.com/>. They make chips that go into
fax machines so that those fax machines can handle Internet fax through
email, which is a standard within the IETF. Which of you wants to be the
one to tell the owners of those machines "yes, they followed the IETF
standards just fine, but we changed those standards so your machines don't
work now". You might leave off the part about "we didn't *have* to change
them to not work, but we chose to anyway".
Like Ned, I'm still quite open to concrete proposals about how to make
UTF-8 work, as long as they meet the other requirements this group has set
out. And, since we're still working on the requirements, everyone has time
to work on making their proposals meet the requirements the best.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium