Re: [idn] a few more comments on the last call documents

["Mark Davis" <mark@macchiato.com>]

transfer encoding syntax would be the right term. See
<http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr17/, section 7.

Mark
—————

Γνῶθι σαυτόν — Θαλῆς
[For transliteration, see http://oss.software.ibm.com/cgi-bin/icu/tr]

http://www.macchiato.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam M. Costello" <idn.amc+0@nicemice.net.RemoveThisWord>
To: "'IETF idn working group'" <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 13:24
Subject: Re: [idn] a few more comments on the last call documents


> Kent Karlsson <kentk@md.chalmers.se> wrote:
>
> > In the UTR 17 model, Punycode is a "Transfer Encoding Syntax"
(TES),
> >
> > A few other things are TESes: UTF-7, MIME/QP, MIME/BASE64, GB/HZ,
and
> > also the syntaxes \uhhhh of Java/C and &#xhhhhh; of XML.
> >
> > I would not simply refer to Punycode as an "encoding", as to many
that
> > would suggest that it was a Character Encoding Scheme or Character
> > Encoding Form.
>
> Would other Unicode experts concur that the title of the Punycode
draft
> should call it a transfer encoding syntax?  Or if it doesn't really
fit
> into the model at all, should it use a vague term like
"transformation"
> rather than "encoding"?
>
> > > sometimes [copy/paste] just retrieves a string from the GUI
> > > corresponding to exactly what is displayed.
> >
> > Any such system/application is SEVERELY FLAWED.
>
> Probably true, but unfortunately it's also quite common.  It's the
norm
> for X Windows applications.  X is severely flawed in many ways.
>
> AMC
>
>