Douglas Otis wrote:
> there could be alternative UTF fields for an author's name
> and reference titles,
For the new 3066bis language tags registry we adopted the
known 𒍅 notation for u+012345. As Bob said raw UTF-8
characters won't fly with `cat rfc4567 > /dev/lpt1` and other
simple uses of RFCs.
> perhaps defined characters for simple line and table drawing
Ugh. That's a case where I'd prefer PDF or something better.
"ASCII art" is one thing, IMHO it's cute. But "line drawing"
char.s are a PITA: my local charset pc-multilingual-850+euro
still has this, today it's just crap, let's forget it please,
"codepage 437" etc. and curses ACS_* are ancient history.
Ok., in theory Unicode has these characters, but if we'd really
want this we could as well jump from plain text to MathML.
> It seems problematic for protocol examples to use non-ASCII
> characters owing to there not being ubiquitously displayable
> character-sets.
Yes, OTOH I vaguely recall one of Martin's (?) texts, where his
attempt to talk about non-ASCII issues in ASCII wasn't straight
forward, to put it mildly, and it certainly wasn't his fault.
Similar texts published by the W3C using UTF-8 are even worse
from my POV (both with a pre-UTF-8 browser and otherwise, for
the latter I just don't have the required fonts).
Bye, Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf