Subject: [I18ndir] Time to revise RFC 2978 (charset registrations)?

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 08:05:56 -0400

On the optimistic, but perhaps deluded, theory that this
directorate is still functional, perhaps we have some advice for
the ADs about what to do about this erratum and whether it is
time to revise RFC 2978 as suggested below?

See 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/zYYu3xItvyCPak6dppZVIRK22PQ
and the message to which it replies,
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/WzwZ2fK9YqzmcKgmblmkLixOfqA
for context.

And, yes, I'll volunteer to work with Ned and Martin to get this
done (and to draft the relevant paragraph about using Unicode
(or appropriate it from elsewhere) if the conclusion is that it
would be helpful.

    john

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 04:50 -0700
From: RFC Errata System <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2978 (6265)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2978,
"IANA Charset Registration Procedures".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6265

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: John Klensin <[email-masked]>

Section: 3.1

Original Text
-------------
Proposed charsets are not formally registered and must not be
used; the "x-" prefix specified in RFC 2045 can be used until
registration is complete.

Corrected Text
--------------
Proposed charsets are not formally registered and must not be
used.

Notes
-----
This section contains a recommendation for temporary use of
charset names with an "X-" prefix.  Given the problems those
have caused and the general prohibition in RFC 6648, probably
that provision should be considered updated and removed by 6648.
Given that the review period is only two weeks, it would seem
that there is little reason for for having proposed charsets
floating around anyway.

Comment: Despite Alexey's 2018 comment on erratum 5433, perhaps
it is time to create a revised document, not only to incorporate
the syntax corrections of prior errata and to get rid of the
"X-" advice, but to put in some text that actively discourages
new registrations and uses of charsets that are not based on
Unicode.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary,
please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified
or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if
necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC2978 (draft-freed-charset-regist-03)
--------------------------------------
Title               : IANA Charset Registration Procedures
Publication Date    : October 2000
Author(s)           : N. Freed, J. Postel
Category            : BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
Source              : Legacy
Area                : Legacy
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 25 Aug 2020 15:41:36 -0400

>time to revise RFC 2978 as suggested below?

You'd hope this would be pretty easy, wouldn't it.  Might be nice to
update this part, too:

   Charset registrations will be posted in the anonymous FTP file
   "ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/character-sets" and all

Also willing to help smith what I'd hope would be a limited number
of words.

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:28:54 -0400

--On Tuesday, August 25, 2020 15:41 -0400 John Levine
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>> directorate is still functional, perhaps we have some advice
>> for the ADs about what to do about this erratum and whether
>> it is time to revise RFC 2978 as suggested below?
> 
> You'd hope this would be pretty easy, wouldn't it.  Might be
> nice to update this part, too:
> 

Yep.  I didn't do a careful reading, partially because that felt
like step 3 as in

(1) Check here (and with Ned and, if he is not reading this,
Martin) and see if there are any reasons to not do so and if
there would be AD support for an AD-sponsored document with
minimum fuss.  That includes being sure that, if Alexey had some
reason for his "unlikely to be revised" statement that we
haven't considered, we know about it and can consider it.

(2) Probably also from this list, figure out whether a draft new
version would have sufficient reviewers who understand the
subject matter to make submission of such a revision draft
plausible.  If there are competent and willing reviewers around
W3C (use in media types) or other parts of the MIME community,
so much the better.  And see if Ned or the RFC Editor have the
XML of RFC 2978 or at least draft-freed-charset-regist-03 around.

(3) If there are positive answers at the first two steps, go
through the RFC carefully, fold in the errata, and clean out
obsolete statements (I have no idea if the "X-" issue is the
only one because I didn't look), dead references (such as the
one above), and similar things.  

Of the three, I think the third is actually the easiest.  On the
other hand, without having clear agreement about the
desirability of doing this and AD willingness to push it
through, I believe it would be a waste of time.

> Also willing to help smith what I'd hope would be a limited
> number of words.

Ack.  And thanks.

    john

---

From: Asmus Freytag <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:40:52 -0700

I would start with (3), identifying
(a) the cobwebs and other things that need obvious attention
(b) additions that may be needed/wise (like the function of charsets in 
the age of Unicode)

With a concrete draft (even one where some edits are left as outline) it 
should be much easier to see what kind of in-depth review is needed (2) 
and whether this looks like enough of a gain to get AD support (1).

A key function of a well maintained registry isn't necessarily in adding 
lots of novel charsets, but also in making sure existing/historical 
charsets are documented.

A./