IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - TheI PPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]

IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - TheI PPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]

IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - TheI PPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]

McDonald, Ira imcdonald at sharplabs.com
Fri Aug 18 21:25:42 EDT 2000


Hi Ned,

Thanks - you're the only person who has reinforced my
periodic comments that the I18N for the stuff in the 
'simple text' email notifications is a nice juicy
problem - since IPP and most (or all?) shipping IPP
Printer implementations define support for multiple
human languages and charsets.

And the fact that a client can ask for a notification
in some other charset than UTF-8 further complicates
I18N, because the obvious starting point (message
catalogs in UTF-8) leads to smashed characters in
many local charsets.

I think the IPP 'mailto:' notification method should
be a good deal more complete on this I18N topic.

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald, consulting architect at Xerox and Sharp
  High North Inc

-----Original Message-----
From: ned.freed at innosoft.com [mailto:ned.freed at innosoft.com]
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 8:21 AM
To: pmoore at peerless.com
Cc: David_Kellerman at nls.com; kugler at us.ibm.com; ipp at pwg.org
Subject: Re: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM -
TheIPPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]

<...snip...> 

Frankly, the bigger problem with this stuff is i18n support for the text.
But that's a different topic.

IMO the supposed difference between simple text and a structured report is a
chimera. Email support in general is another matter, of course.

				Ned



More information about the Ipp mailing list