1221 UTF-8 Encoding Mandatory or Optional

Created: 28 Feb 2014

Status: In Force (green)

Part: Part 6 (2009-12; Edition 2)

Links:

Page: 36 & 212

Clause: 8.4 & Annex G Respectively

Paragraph:

Category: No impact on this part

Issue

UTF-8 looks to be a ‘preferred’ option, but not mandatory from the clause 8.4 extract of Part 6 which states and uses the word 'preferred'. However, in Annex G the SICS statement shows the import/export of UTF-8 to be Mandatory, but the comments contains a question 'Other XML codings?'

To summarise: Do we require UTF-8 for ICD files? Or do we allow other encodings like, for example,ISO-8859-1?

Proposal

Do we need to limit which can be used?
Do we need to define a list of which are allowed then these should declared in Part 6 and also be referenced in Annex ZA 'Referenced Documents'.

Discussion	Created	Status
	05 Aug 14	In Force (green)
UTF-8 is mandatory according to part 6 SICS. No further changes needed.	26 Jun 14	Ballot Period
I fully agree with Wolfgang. As stated in SISC of part 6 Ed2, UTF-8 is the mandatory format for export and import of all tools. There is no need to have additional mandatory encoding, thus increasing the complexibility of the tool interoperability.	31 Mar 14	Discussion (red)
UTF-8 is the mandatory format for export and import of all tools, as stated in the SICS. This assures interoperability. As it is not the most efficient coding in all cases, other standard XML codings can be supported by tools. The declaration in the SICS supports users in detecting export/import interoperability between tools for these optional formats.	28 Feb 14	Discussion (red)

Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer

Tissue DB v. 24.12.6.1