RFC relevance of registration

As per Relevance of the word registration, we have this rfc below:

Network Working Group N.
Request for Comments: 2278
BCP: 19 J.
Category: Best Current Practice
January 1998

IANA
Registration

Status of this

This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for
Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions
improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited

Copyright

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved

1.

MIME [RFC-2045, RFC-2046, RFC-2047, RFC-2184] and various
modern Internet protocols are capable of using many
charsets. This in turn means that the ability to label
charsets is essential. This registration procedure exists solely
associate a specific name or names with a given charset and to
an indication of whether or not a given charset can be used in
text objects. In particular, the general applicability
appropriateness of a given registered charset is a protocol issue
not a registration issue, and is not dealt with by this
procedure

2. Definitions and

The following sections define various terms used in this document

2.1. Requirements

This document occasionally uses terms that appear in capital letters
When the terms "MUST", "SHOULD", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY
appear capitalized, they are being used to indicate
requirements of this specification. A discussion of the meanings
these terms appears in [RFC-2119].

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 1]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

2.2.

A member of a set of elements used for the organisation, control,
representation of data

2.3.

The term "charset" (see historical note below) is used here to
to a method of converting a sequence of octets into a sequence
characters. This conversion may also optionally produce
control information such as directionality indicators

Note that unconditional and unambiguous conversion in the
direction is not required, in that not all characters may
representable by a given charset and a charset may provide more
one sequence of octets to represent a particular sequence
characters

This definition is intended to allow charsets to be defined in
variety of different ways, from simple single-table mappings such
US-ASCII to complex table switching methods such as those that
ISO 2022's techniques, to be used as charsets. However,
definition associated with a charset name must fully specify
mapping to be performed. In particular, use of external
information to determine the exact mapping is not permitted

HISTORICAL NOTE: The term "character set" was originally used in
to describe such straightforward schemes as US-ASCII and ISO-8859-1
which consist of a small set of characters and a simple one-to-
mapping from single octets to single characters. Multi-
character encoding schemes and switching techniques make
situation much more complex. As such, the definition of this term
revised to emphasize both the conversion aspect of the process,
the term itself has been changed to "charset" to emphasize that it
not, after all, just a set of characters. A discussion of
issues as well as specification of standard terminology for use
the IETF appears in RFC 2130.

2.4. Coded Character

A Coded Character Set (CCS) is a mapping from a set of
characters to a set of integers. Examples of coded character sets
ISO 10646 [ISO-10646], US-ASCII [US-ASCII], and the ISO-8859
[ISO-8859].

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 2]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

2.5. Character Encoding

A Character Encoding Scheme (CES) is a mapping from a Coded
Set or several coded character sets to a set of octets. A given
is typically associated with a single CCS; for example, UTF-8
only to ISO 10646.

3. Registration

Registered charsets are expected to conform to a number
requirements as described below

3.1. Required

Registered charsets MUST conform to the definition of a "charset
given above. In addition, charsets intended for use in MIME
types under the "text" top-level type must conform to
restrictions on that type described in RFC 2045. All
charsets MUST note whether or not they are suitable for use in MIME

All charsets which are constructed as a composition of a CCS and
CES MUST either include the CCS and CES they are based on in
registration or else cite a definition of their CCS and CES
appears elsewhere

All registered charsets MUST be specified in a stable,
available specification. Registration of charsets
specifications aren't stable and openly available is forbidden

3.2. New

This registration mechanism is not intended to be a vehicle for
definition of entirely new charsets. This is due to the fact that
registration process does NOT contain adequate review mechanisims
such undertakings

As such, only charsets defined by other processes and
bodies, or specific profiles of such charsets, are eligible
registration

3.3. Naming

One or more names MUST be assigned to all registered charsets
Multiple names for the same charset are permitted, but if
names are assigned a single primary name for the charset MUST
identified. All other names are considered to be aliases for
primary name and use of the primary name is preferred over use of
of the aliases

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 3]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

Each assigned name MUST uniquely identify a single charset.
charset names MUST be suitable for use as the value of a MIME
type charset parameter and hence MUST conform to MIME parameter
syntax. This applies even if the specific charset being registered
not suitable for use with the "text" media type

Finally, charsets being registered for use with the "text" media
MUST have a primary name that conforms to the more restrictive
of the charset field in MIME encoded-words [RFC-2047, RFC-2184]
MIME extended parameter values [RFC-2184]. A combined ABNF
for such names is as follows

mime-charset = 1*
cspecials = "(" / ")" / "<" / ">" / "@" / "," / ";" / ":" / "
<"> / "/" / "[" / "]" / "?" / "." / "=" / "*"

CHAR = character> ; ( 0-177, 0.-127.)
SPACE = ; ( 40, 32.)
CTL = character and DEL> ; ( 177, 127.)

3.4. Functionality

Charsets must function as actual charsets: Registration of
that are better thought of as a transfer encoding, as a media type
or as a collection of separate entities of another type, is
allowed. For example, although HTML could theoretically be
of as a charset, it is really better thought of as a media type
as such it cannot be registered as a charset

3.5. Usage and Implementation

Use of a large number of charsets in a given protocol may
interoperability. However, the use of a large number of
and/or unlabelled charsets hampers interoperability even more

A charset should therefore be registered ONLY if it adds
functionality that is valuable to a large community, OR if
documents existing practice in a large community. Note that
registered for the second reason should be explicitly marked as
of limited or specialized use and should only be used in
messages with prior bilateral agreement

3.6. Publication

Charset registrations can be published in RFCs, however,
publication is not required to register a new charset

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 4]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

The registration of a charset does not imply endorsement, approval
or recommendation by the IANA, IESG, or IETF, or even
that the specification is adequate. It is expected that
statements for particular applications will be published from time
time that recommend implementation of, and support for, charsets
have proven particularly useful in those contexts

3.7. MIBenum

Each registered charset MUST also be assigned a unique
integer value. These "MIBenum" values are defined by and used in
Printer MIB [RFC-1759].

A MIBenum value for each charset will be assigned by IANA at the
of registration

4. Registration

The following procedure has been implemented by the IANA for
and approval of new charsets. This is not a formal
process, but rather an administrative procedure intended to
community comment and sanity checking without excessive time delay

4.1. Present the Charset to the

Send the proposed charset registration to the "ietf
charsets@iana.org" mailing list. This mailing list has
established for the sole purpose of reviewing proposed
registrations. Proposed charsets are not formally registered and
not be used; the "x-" prefix specified in RFC 2045 can be used
registration is complete

The intent of the public posting is to solicit comments and
on the definition of the charset and the name chosen for it over
two week period

4.2. Charset

When the two week period has passed and the registration proposer
convinced that consensus has been achieved, the
application should be submitted to IANA and the charset reviewer.
charset reviewer, who is appointed by the IETF Applications
Director(s), either approves the request for registration or
it. Rejection may occur because of significant objections raised
the list or objections raised externally. If the charset
considers the registration sufficiently important and controversial
a last call for comments may be issued to the full IETF. The

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 5]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

reviewer may also recommend standards track processing (before
after registration) when that appears appropriate and the level
specification of the charset is adequate

Decisions made by the reviewer must be posted to the ietf-
mailing list within 14 days. Decisions made by the reviewer may
appealed to the IESG

4.3. IANA

Provided that the charset registration has either passed review
has been successfully appealed to the IESG, the IANA will
the charset, assign a MIBenum value, and make its
available to the community

5. Location of Registered Charset

Charset registrations will be posted in the anonymous FTP
"ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/character-sets" and
registered charsets will be listed in the periodically
"Assigned Numbers" RFC [currently RFC-1700]. The description of
charset may also be published as an Informational RFC by sending
to "rfc-editor@isi.edu" (please follow the instructions to
authors [RFC-2223]).

6. Registration

To: ietf-charsets@iana.
Subject: Registration of new

Charset name(s):

(All names must be suitable for use as the value of a MIME content
type parameter.)

Published specification(s):

(A specification for the charset must be openly available
accurately describes what is being registered. If a charset
defined as a composition of a CCS and a CES then these
must either be included or referenced.)

Person & email address to contact for further information

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 6]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

7. Security

This registration procedure is not known to raise any sort
security considerations that are appreciably different from
already existing in the protocols that employ registered charsets

8.

[ISO-2022]
International Standard -- Information Processing --
Code Structure and Extension Techniques, ISO/IEC 2022:1994, 4
ed

[ISO-8859]
International Standard -- Information Processing -- 8-
Single-Byte Coded Graphic Character
- Part 1: Latin Alphabet No. 1, ISO 8859-1:1987, 1st ed
- Part 2: Latin Alphabet No. 2, ISO 8859-2:1987, 1st ed
- Part 3: Latin Alphabet No. 3, ISO 8859-3:1988, 1st ed
- Part 4: Latin Alphabet No. 4, ISO 8859-4:1988, 1st ed
- Part 5: Latin/Cyrillic Alphabet, ISO 8859-5:1988, 1
ed
- Part 6: Latin/Arabic Alphabet, ISO 8859-6:1987, 1st ed
- Part 7: Latin/Greek Alphabet, ISO 8859-7:1987, 1st ed
- Part 8: Latin/Hebrew Alphabet, ISO 8859-8:1988, 1st ed
- Part 9: Latin Alphabet No. 5, ISO/IEC 8859-9:1989, 1
ed
International Standard -- Information Technology -- 8-
Single-Byte Coded Graphic Character
- Part 10: Latin Alphabet No. 6, ISO/IEC 8859-10:1992,
1st ed

[ISO-10646]
ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993(E), "Information technology --
Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS) --
Part 1: Architecture and Basic Multilingual Plane",
JTC1/SC2, 1993.

[RFC-2048]
Freed, N., Klensin, J., and J. Postel, "Multipurpose
Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures",
2048, November 1996.

[RFC-1700]
Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2,
1700, October 1994.

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 7]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

[RFC-1759]
Smith, R., Wright, F., Hastings, T., Zilles, S., and J
Gyllenskog, "Printer MIB", RFC 1759, March 1995.

[RFC-2045]
Freed, N., and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet
Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies",
RFC 2045, November 1996.

[RFC-2046]
Freed, N., and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet
Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046,
1996.

[RFC-2047]
Moore, K., "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME)
Three: Representation of Non-Ascii Text in Internet
Headers", RFC 2047, November 1996.

[RFC-2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

[RFC-2130]
Weider, C., Preston, C., Simonsen, K., Alvestrand, H., Atkinson
R., Crispin, M., and P. Svanberg, "Report from the IAB
Set Workshop", RFC 2130, April 1997.

[RFC-2184]
Freed, N., and K. Moore, "MIME Parameter Value and Encoded
Extensions: Character Sets, Languages, and Continuations",
2184, August 1997.

[US-ASCII
Coded Character Set -- 7-Bit American Standard Code
Information Interchange, ANSI X3.4-1986.

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 8]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

9. Authors'

Ned
Innosoft International, Inc
1050 Lakes
West Covina, CA 91790

Phone: +1 626 919 3600
Fax: +1 626 919 3614
EMail: ned.freed@innosoft.

Jon
USC/Information Sciences
4676 Admiralty
Marina del Rey, CA 90292

Phone: +1 310 822 1511
Fax: +1 310 823 6714
EMail: Postel@ISI.

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 9]

RFC 2278 Charset Registration January 1998

Full Copyright

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied,
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
included on all such copies and derivative works. However,
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other
English

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns

This document and the information contained herein is provided on
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE

Freed & Postel Best Current Practice [Page 10]

if you see any problems within the linking, don't worry be happy,
this is version 0.1 of the Relevance System and you gotta expect some crappy subroutines sometimes,
just be content we did not write this in Java, which would have made this "bigger and better" HAHAHHA.

RFC documents can be found at I.E.T.F.

Relevance System Copyright © 2002 Spectrum WorldResearch
other technical nosh by ServerMasters Corporation
collaboration of BobX