RE: UTF-8 (Re: draft-legg-ldap-gser-abnf-06.txt and friends)

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

So is the text at top of page 4:
   o  The octet values C0, C1, FE and FF never appear. If the range of
      character numbers is restricted to U+0000..U+10FFFF (the UTF-16
      accessible range), then the octet values F5..FD also never appear.
a bit misleading in the 2nd sentence, where it says: If the range...
And maybe it better would say: Since the range...

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no]
> Sent: donderdag 29 mei 2003 10:43
> To: Bill Fenner; hardie@qualcomm.com
> Cc: iesg@ietf.org
> Subject: UTF-8 (Re: draft-legg-ldap-gser-abnf-06.txt and friends)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --On søndag, mai 25, 2003 13:24:23 -0700 Bill Fenner 
> <fenner@research.att.com> wrote:
> 
> > (Maybe we talked about this when 2279bis happened, but I must have
> > forgotten already -- why was it OK to delete the 5 and 6 byte
> > versions?
> 
> Because UNICODE and ISO in their infinite wisdom answered your next 
> question....
> 
> > Will there never be UCS characters larger than U+10FFFF?
> 
> No. They can't be encoded in UTF-16, so rather than extend 
> UTF-16, they 
> just declared that the problem will never arise.
> 
> > Should this change be mentioned in 2279bis in a "changes since 2279
> > section"?
> 
> It is there, although the implications may be less than obvious:
> 
> 12. Changes from RFC 2279
> 
>    o  Restricted the range of characters to 0000-10FFFF (the UTF-16
>       accessible range).
> 
> > Am I attempting to retroactively apply a DISCUSS on a
> > document?
> 
> I hope not - draft-yergeau needs to get out the door!
> 
> >  Will the questions never end?)
> 
> 
> Never :-)
>