On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 05:36:21PM -0600, Pete Resnick wrote: > On 1/11/15 10:54 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > > >On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 05:28:30PM -0500, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > >>>I'd go even further than that and just mandate MUST ASCII. > >>I don't know if the IETF is "allowed" to do that any more, but +1 for > >>the reasons you list. > >I'm not sure if the IESG will agree to that... > > Given that this particular member of the IESG has (successfully) > argued vehemently for ASCII-only on multiple occasions in the recent > past, I would say that your worries on that score are overdone. :-) Well alright. I'd love to see a set of guidelines for I18N activities. When should we try to support Unicode, and when should we not? Is it one of those "I know it when I see it" kinds of guidelines? That wouldn't be useful enough :( Mind you, IIRC PKCS#11 didn't even say anything about ASCII before. Token labels and such used to be fixed-sized octet strings containing character data. Jan can correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not sure even saying "ASCII-only" would necessarily be safe in that case... Fortunately the OASIS PKCS11 TC has clarified that these are UTF-8; unfortunately they left other I18N details out. Nico --