[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up
- To: Group for discussing encoding and content validation schemes for CIF2 <cif2-encoding@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up
- From: James Hester <jamesrhester@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 15:01:39 +1000
- In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009222238050.96262@epsilon.pair.com>
- References: <AANLkTi=hmKNFMgaeMqt69=sG6dOmxZRUrffB1khjF+mZ@mail.gmail.com><alpine.BSF.2.00.1009222238050.96262@epsilon.pair.com>
Indeed, point taken. On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com> wrote: > Please characterize my proposal as > > 'as for CIF1 proposal with UTF8 in place of ASCII' > > ===================================================== > Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science > Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121 > Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769 > > +1-631-244-3035 > yaya@dowling.edu > ===================================================== > > On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, James Hester wrote: > >> Dear CIF2 encoding participants, >> >> As Herbert has indicated, we are starting to run out of time for >> resolution of the encoding issue. I believe that we have now explored >> the various proposals sufficiently to all have a good understanding of >> the consequences and advantages of each approach. So, after a round >> of final comments, I propose that we vote on the general scheme that >> we recommend. We can then flesh out the details of the particular >> scheme that we have settled on, and take this completed proposal to >> the DDLm group for their approval, following which we will present the >> entire CIF2 syntax document to COMCIFS for a formal vote. >> >> The proposals that I believe are still on the table are: >> >> 1. Herbert's 'as for CIF1 proposal' recently posted here and to COMCIFS. >> 2. Herbert's 'as for CIF1 proposal', together with Brian's proposal >> (if you agree that they are compatible) >> 2. UTF8-only as in the original draft >> 3. UTF8 + UTF16 >> 4. UTF8, UTF16 + "local" >> >> I have not included the hashcode proposal as I believe it no longer >> has any supporters. >> >> We would need to conduct a preferential vote. I stress that this is >> purely to determine the recommendation of this working group, and is >> not in any way binding on COMCIFS. >> >> James. >> -- >> T +61 (02) 9717 9907 >> F +61 (02) 9717 3145 >> M +61 (04) 0249 4148 >> _______________________________________________ >> cif2-encoding mailing list >> cif2-encoding@iucr.org >> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/cif2-encoding >> > _______________________________________________ > cif2-encoding mailing list > cif2-encoding@iucr.org > http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/cif2-encoding > -- T +61 (02) 9717 9907 F +61 (02) 9717 3145 M +61 (04) 0249 4148 _______________________________________________ cif2-encoding mailing list cif2-encoding@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/cif2-encoding
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up (James Hester)
- Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Prev by Date: Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up
- Next by Date: Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up
- Prev by thread: Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up
- Next by thread: Re: [Cif2-encoding] How we wrap this up
- Index(es):