Re: [tlug] Japanese Encoding - which one?

[Ian Wells <ijw@example.com>]

On 11/25/05, Brett Robson <b-robson@example.com> wrote:

Stephen, while I agree with many of your points, in criticising me and
what I've written you are letting your evangelical zeal get the better
of you. We can argue about the semantics of "should" and "breach" in
relation to standards but it's moot as I qualified this, a point you
have continually ignored in your rush to lecture me.

Stephen's not lecturing you.  He's not telling you you must use UTF-8; he's not saying that you're violating RFCs; and he's not saying that violating RFCs is a crime.

He's telling you that your original statement (as quoted here) was wrong:

>     Brett> [...] Using UTF for for Japanese email
>     Brett> breaches RFCs, you are supposed to use 2022-JP.

In contradiction to your unqualified statement above, it *doesn't* breach RFCs.  And as it's not even recommended in the relevant RFC, 'you are supposed to use 2022-JP' could perhaps have been better written 'I recommend you use 2022-JP as it's the most broadly compatible'.  From my reading of what's been said, he's just pointed out that you should avoid overly broad statements.

Now, if you accused him (and me) of pedantry, you would be on much safer ground...

--
Ian.