Subject: Re: PMP> Last call Printer MIB comment: simple localization proposal

From: Matt Young <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 18:53:13 -0700

Tom Hastings wrote:
<Simple localization change proposal from Tom Hastings>

Being new to PWG activities, I'm not sure what to think about a change
like this that comes just days before the Printer MIB was to step into
the next level of standards Nirvana -- is this normal? :-)

Also being new, I'm not sure if this sort of thing is standard around
April 1st.  After looking at RFC 2277, I tend to think I must be falling
for a pretty good April Fools joke because it has lots of stuff in there
about using character sets other than UTF-8.

Just in case it really isn't an April Fools joke, here's my input: 
let's change the MIB instead to say that UTF-8 SHOULD be used for all
localization.

-- 
Matt Young
([email-masked]) Hewlett-Packard Department LaserJet Division

---

From: Tom Hastings <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 09:58:15 PST

>the next level of standards Nirvana -- is this normal? :-)

Apparently, proposes for change do happen during "last call".  Witness
the attempt to change to XML for IPP during IPP's last call.

Also, because the Printer MIB has been waiting for the HR MIB for
almost a year, other IETF requirements, such as the Charset and Language
Policy have caught up with us.  And the policy says thay the IESG can take 
the Printer MIB off the standards track, if we don't comply.

>let's change the MIB instead to say that UTF-8 SHOULD be used for all

The policy says SHALL, so SHOULD isn't good enough.