[whatwg] Superset encodings [Re: ISO-8859-* and the C1 control range]

[NARUSE, Yui]

Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> Authors should not use JIS-X-0208 (JIS_C6226-1983), JIS-X-0212
>>> (JIS_X0212-1990), encodings based on ISO-2022, and encodings based on
>>> EBCDIC.
>> It is not clear what this means (e.g., the character set JIS_C6226-1983 in
>> any encoding, or only when encoded alone according to RFC1345 as described
>> above); 
> 
> This is talking about character encodings, not character sets. 
> "JIS_C6226-1983" is a registered character encoding in the IANA registry.

Yes, I can understand this, but...

> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, NARUSE, Yui wrote:
>>>>> Authors should not use JIS-X-0208 (JIS_C6226-1983), JIS-X-0212 
>>>>> (JIS_X0212-1990), encodings based on ISO-2022, and encodings based 
>>>>> on EBCDIC.
>> First, JIS-X-0208 and JIS-X-0212 are not in IANA Charsets, moreover 
>> those correct names as spec are JIS X 0208 and JIS X 0212.
> 
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, �istein E. Andersen wrote:
>> I am not sure what you mean; they are both listed at
>> <http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets>:
>>
>> Name: JIS_C6226-1983                                     [RFC1345,KXS2]
>> MIBenum: 63
>> Source: ECMA registry
>> Alias: iso-ir-87
>> Alias: x0208
>> Alias: JIS_X0208-1983
>> Alias: csISO87JISX0208
>>
>> Name: JIS_X0212-1990                                     [RFC1345,KXS2]
>> MIBenum: 98
>> Source: ECMA registry
>> Alias: x0212
>> Alias: iso-ir-159
>> Alias: csISO159JISX02121990
> 
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, NARUSE, Yui wrote:
>> Where is the word "JIS-X-0208" ?
>> Where is the word "JIS-X-0212" ?
> 
> The exact string isn't there, that's why I included the preferred MIME 
> names in brackets in the spec.

if it is talking about character encodings,
why it uses the name of character sets mainly?
Following seems better.

 Authors should not use JIS_C6226-1983, JIS_X0212-1990,
 encodings based on ISO-2022, and encodings based 

> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, NARUSE, Yui wrote:
>> Second, JIS_C6226-1983, JIS_X0212-1990, and EBCDICs are not
>> ASCII compatible. So they are out of discouraged; mustn't use.
> 
> You can use non-ASCII-compatible encodings (e.g. UTF-16).

I see.

-- 
NARUSE, Yui  <naruse at airemix.jp>