I think the suggestion from me and Tom (if I interpret his email correctly) is to state that messages can be truncated at the end at an arbitrary point. We also make a note that this may result in invalid UTF character encoding, or a change in UTF character.
I don't think it even warrants a SHOULD for truncation to preserve UTF character in full. Valid characters when you only get some of them after truncation may result in a wrong language word, anyway. Anton. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Reed > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 8:57 AM > To: Tom Petch > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation > > > Is the truncation of a message on a UTF-8 boundary rather > than within an extended character something that syslog > daemons SHOULD do rather than MUST do ? (To use the RFC words.) > > Darren > > _______________________________________________ > Syslog mailing list > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
