P2498 Forward compatibility of text_encoding with additional encoding registries

[wg21bot]

P2498R0 Forward compatibility of text_encoding with additional encoding registries (Peter Brett)

[cor3ntin]

@tahonermann @peter-b I'm removing the LEWG tag, please add it back if and when SG-16 forward this. Thanks

[wg21bot]

P2498R1 Forward compatibility of text_encoding with additional encoding registries (Peter Brett)

[tahonermann]

SG16 reviewed P2498R1 during its 2022-02-09 telecon. The following polls were taken.

• Poll 1A: It should be more explicit in the identifiers used by the text_encoding
  interface that the facility is tied to the IANA character sets database.

  • Attendance: 8

    SF	F	N	A	SA
    2	3	1	2	0

  • Weak consensus in favor.

• Poll 1B: The text_encoding class design should be modified to facilitate potential
  future association with additional encoding registries without retaining a bias towards
  the IANA registry.

  • Attendance: 8 (one abstention)

    SF	F	N	A	SA
    1	3	2	0	1

  • No consensus.

  • SA: I think IANA is a reasonable default and others can be added; we shouldn't slow
    down progress.

• Poll 1C: The text_encoding class should be renamed to iana_text_encoding.

  • Attendance: 8

    SF	F	N	A	SA
    1	2	2	3	0

  • No consensus.

• Poll 1D: Address feedback on wording in P2498R1 "Forward compatibility of text_encoding
  with additional encoding registries", and forward the paper as revised to LEWG as a bug
  fix for P1885 "Naming text encodings to demystify them" with a recommended ship vehicle
  of C++23.

  • Attendance: 8 (one abstention)

    SF	F	N	A	SA
    1	4	0	2	0

  • Weak consensus in favor.

Removing the SG16 label and adding LEWG. @brycelelbach, please ensure this paper is promptly scheduled for review as it proposes a change to a new C++23 feature.

[peter-b]

Based on recent feedback on P1885, I won't be progressing this proposal any further.