Ed Hart responded privately but I trust he won't object to my forwarding his
response:
> From amendment 2: UCS Transformation format 8 (UTF-8)
>
> I'll see you on Wednesday afternoon.
>
> Best regards,
> Ed
>
> ----------
> From: Misha Wolf [SMTP:misha.wolf@reuters.com]
> Sent: 01 September, 1997 17:11
> To: Multiple Recipients of
> Subject: Re: Charset policy - Post Munich
>
> [I'm copying this mail to the unicode list. If any Unicoder responds,
> please copy your response to (ietf-charsets@innosoft.com).]
>
> A couple of minor comments:
>
> > (Note: ISO 10646 calls the UTF-8 CES a "Transfer Format" rather
> > than a "character encoding scheme", but it fits the charset report
> > definition of a character encoding scheme).
>
> As I'm on the road (actually at the Eleventh International Unicode
> Conference), I don't have access to the ISO 10646 amendments. I think
> that ISO 10646 calls UTF-8 a "Transformation Format", not a "Transfer
> Format". Can anyone check this? RFC 2130 contains many incorrect
> definitions including those of ASCII (!) and of UTF; please let's not
> add to them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
Reuters Ltd.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:36 EDT