- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:51:17 +0200
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 15.06.2010 17:36, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > On 2010-06-15 13:05, Sam Ruby wrote: >> We have a change proposal to replace the reference to RFC 1345 to a >> reference to an ANSI or ISO spec that defines ASCII, such as >> [ANSI.X3-4.1986]: >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0084.html >> >> At the present time, we have no counter proposals. Accordingly, the >> chairs are issuing a call for consensus at this time. If there are no >> objections, we will adopt this change proposal on June 22, 2010. > > ANSI.X3.4-1986 is apparently nowhere to be found. I even tried searching > the ANSI website and their Standards Store for it, and came up with > nothing at all. Referencing a specification which, for all intents and > purposes, is effectively non-existent and unavailable in any form would > not be useful. (It's probably printed and hidden in some archive > somewhere, but still out of reach of most people). Nor is citing something that doesn't define it. Anyway, for all practical purposes everybody knows what US-ASCII is, so I doubt that it makes any difference whether the referenced document is available on-line or not. If you go back to the original thread, several alternative documents were mentioned (see <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0103.html>), which would be equally acceptable and available online. > This issue should be left up to the discretion of the editor to either > leave it as a reference to RFC 1345 or change it to an alternative, > publicly available reference. The editor had several months to do so and didn't. What makes you think he will unless there's a WG decision? Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2010 15:51:58 UTC