[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Display types?
[ I'm taking this discussion back onto the list, I hope that's ok ]
Paul Leach <email@example.com> writes:
> You can use any charset you like with your friends -- it just won't
> interoperate with others. The MUST in _standards_ is for when you are
> interoperating with "non-local" people with whom you _don't_ have a private
Sorry, but you're missing my point. Say I use iso-8859-1 for my local
spki use. *If* I can use a display-type, or some other mechanism to
tell the spki software that I'm using latin1, everything is fine.
However, what is being discussed here is *removing* that very
Say that for my local use I have some standard spki object with my
name, "Niels Möller", in one of its name fields, without any
display-type to tell the software that I'm using latin1. Now, "Möller"
is not a valid UTF-8 string. That means that *any* complying
SPKI-aware software I'm using will reject the object. (If the string
happened to also be valid UTF-8, it would be misinterpreted, which
wouldn't be much better).
So for this "local use" of mine, I will have to write my own software,
and even worse, there's no way to make that software of mine comply
with the spki standard. Summary: Any use of local charsets in spki
objects is by definition *impossible*, because there's no way to
support anything but UTF-8 without breaking the spki standard.
Standards and interoperability is not only about sending data across
the internet, it is also about different implementations
Do you understand my problem? If UTF-8 is the recommended encoding for
most non-local uses of spki, that's just fine with me. What bothers me
is the removal of the *possibility* to support local char sets in a