> On Oct 27, 2025, at 1:49 PM, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Oct 27, 2025, at 8:42 AM, Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Dear RSWG: >> >> Section 3, 1st para says: >> >> The policy for the RFC Series is that all displayable text is allowed >> as long as the reader of an RFC can interpret that text. >> >> The closest thing in RFC 7997 appears in Section 6, which says: >> >> The ability to use non-ASCII characters in RFCs in a clear and >> consistent manner will improve the ability to describe >> internationalized protocols and will recognize the diversity of >> authors. However, the goal of readability will override the use of >> non-ASCII characters within the text. >> >> I find the text in RFC 7997 to be more clear policy language; however, I >> think two changes are appropriate: >> >> 1) It should recognize the diversity of both authors and readers. >> 2) The final sentence should say that the readability takes priority over >> the character choice. > > Earlier discussion indicated that we are much less concerned about the > authors than of readers. It is up to the streams to tell the RPC if an > author's requirements for particular displayable text should be considered. > > Isn't this a place where, again, we can let the RPC make their best > judgement? The current sentence doesn't (or shouldn't) restrict them.
The rfc7997bis language is focused on the reader. the original RFC 7997 test was focused on the author. So, I am confused by your reply. Russ -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
