-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Mark Davis wrote:
> A few notes:
>
> - IANA is a registry. I believe the only legitimate grounds that they have
> for denying a registration is that it is incompletely specified or has a
> misleading name.
No, that's not correct. The relevant document defining IANA's procedure is
BCP 19 (which is currently RFC 2978). Here are some quotes:
# 2.5. Usage and Implementation Requirements
#
# Use of a large number of charsets in a given protocol may hamper
# interoperability. However, the use of a large number of undocumented
# and/or unlabeled charsets hampers interoperability even more.
#
# A charset should therefore be registered ONLY if it adds significant
# functionality that is valuable to a large community, OR if it
# documents existing practice in a large community. Note that charsets
# registered for the second reason should be explicitly marked as being
# of limited or specialized use and should only be used in Internet
# messages with prior bilateral agreement.
[...]
# 3.1. Present the Charset to the Community
#
[...]
# The posting of a charset to the list [ietf-charsets@iana.org]
# initiates a two week public review process.
#
# The intent of the public posting is to solicit comments and feedback
# on the definition of the charset and the name chosen for it.
#
# 3.2. Charset Reviewer
#
# When the two week period has passed and the registration proposer is
# convinced that consensus has been achieved, the registration
# application should be submitted to IANA and the charset reviewer.
# The charset reviewer, who is appointed by the IETF Applications Area
# Director(s), either approves the request for registration or rejects
# it. Rejection may occur because of significant objections raised on
# the list or objections raised externally. If the charset reviewer
# considers the registration sufficiently important and controversial,
# a last call for comments may be issued to the full IETF. The charset
# reviewer may also recommend standards track processing (before or
# after registration) when that appears appropriate and the level of
# specification of the charset is adequate.
#
# The charset reviewer must reach a decision and post it to the ietf-
# charsets mailing list within two weeks. Decisions made by the
# reviewer may be appealed to the IESG.
So, there is no requirement for IANA to accept a registration just
because it is completely specified.
> Whether or not the Unicode consortium registered CESU-8 or
> not, someone else could (and probably would) do so.
Not if the UTR specifically says that it shouldn't be registered,
because the charset reviewer would take that into account.
Also, the reviewer might reject it anyway, if enough people object
within the comment period. I would object, and presumably the other
people who have argued against CESU-8 here would.
- --
David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>
Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/
RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5 0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01
Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a
public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been
seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv
iQEVAwUBO6Tr6jkCAxeYt5gVAQEWrwf/ZPdU+Y/yq0cLA6C6Xy12TOC5UjWZfJjg
B2Asjlm53MGTjB701JbQy3vgEerIoZ6XrlW/i2OOjw+/a83haCcPsAXlZYajWF3S
l3GI5nYkjJyQGKvcH7xUojs2A4dPo+HlggpAxBbWjIR4mFVZi/kzl3rWr19Xfzu9
DfzQN3uqOjkOk4DarAS8ZDSc20aUgonZWidCskABOvpeC2UlGa4C+DL7Ro3eXADA
4m/M9D4RXOM04VKmPJtAAw68Nz+Jq+vyszRnKewIdf9S+zS4yZBvx5YFwBTMdrTX
KbznaRAKH6pb/Kg+y35LYxeYZIplvD1gt6CY/f4X6iVVVn3jMUWEXA==
=I4pn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Sep 17 2001 - 17:52:11 EDT