On Sun, Feb 9, 2025 at 10:20 AM John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On the other hand, they are probably inappropriate as they stand. As
a trivial example, private use code points are used, as the document
(and the Unicode specs) indicate, by private agreements among
cooperating parties. But different cooperating parties may have very
different uses for them and use them differently, making them a
threat to general interoperability. Therefore saying that they are
not problematic and are reasonable for use in general-purpose Unicode
subsets is, well, problematic.
To use this example, I think the document does well here. It's fine to allow private use code points in general protocols like HTTP. How else are they to be sent? Think of free-text fields like this message. I can understand the need for more restrictive specifications in fields with narrower requirements (like a URL). What I do agree with is that you probably don't want to be sending around obsolete control characters unless you really mean it.
thanks,
Rob
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
