Responding off-list at the request of Mark Nottingham.
On 03/15/2011 01:10 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Tuesday, March 15, 2011 12:03 -0400 Sam Ruby
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 03/15/2011 11:34 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
FYI:
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0302
.html>
...I'm sure that this will come up during Last Call again.
This issue can be REOPENED if there is new information
presented. An example of such new information is listed in
the email cited above.
And, if you (collectively) decided to do so, you might consider
the note I sent a few minutes ago as "new information", since,
as far as I can tell from the poll discussion or summary, the WG
apparently did not consider use of either RFC 20 or RFC 5198 as
options.
If you have new information you would like to have the chairs consider,
please send (or have somebody send on your behalf) a message to the
Chairs coping the HTML working group. The chairs are unlikely to
seriously consider such a request unless that request is accompanied by
a Change Proposal:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#change-proposal
john
- Sam Ruby
p.s. The objective of having an authoritative definition of
ASCII that is available for free is a non-starter. There is
only one authoritative definition and that is the one published
by the body that is now called ANSI. That is not only
copyright-controlled and sold but the 1968 version is out of
print. Please remember that "ASCII" is an abbreviation for
"American Standard Code for Information Interchange" not a
descriptor of a list of code points. If you want free, stable,
and available, you are going to have to go with an authoritative
and stable copy of the code point list and whatever else you are
interested in.
