On Jan 10, 2015, at 2:04 PM, Mike Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > Rather than adding a clarification/disclaimer clause, how about this wording, > which keeps things simple and inline? > > UTF8(STRING) denotes the octets of the UTF-8 [RFC3629] representation of > STRING, where STRING is a sequence of zero or more Unicode characters. > > ASCII(STRING) denotes the octets of the ASCII [RFC20] representation of > STRING, where STRING is a sequence of zero or more ASCII characters. > > In particular, I'd rather avoid the description "unspecified" in the specs, > which could raise more questions than it answers for implementers. Also, I > believe that the new clauses accomplish the constraining of the character > sets that your wording included.
This wording makes me happy. Thanks for working it through! _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
