Vint Cerf vint at
Fri Feb 9 20:01:11 CET 2007


Unless you want to start another conflagration, please accept that there are
extremely solid reasons for putting some symbols into this category. There
are others that must be accepted and a third category which is basically not
well enough understood to know but should not be allowed in until the
uncertainties are resolved.



Vinton G Cerf
Chief Internet Evangelist
Regus Suite 384
13800 Coppermine Road
Herndon, VA 20171
+1 703 234-1823
+1 703-234-5822 (f)
vint at

-----Original Message-----
From: idna-update-bounces at
[mailto:idna-update-bounces at] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 1:45 PM
To: idna-update at
Subject: Re: IDNNever.txt


I am sort of knew to this level of the discussion but am wondering at the
extent of the list.  e.g I have been curious why some of the symbols would
not be allowed.  I tend to look at the possibility of symbolic labels as
offering a possible alternative for non literate people on special

Are there technical issues that make these problematic?  Or is this a policy
decision that is being encapsulated into the technical solution?


On 2 feb 2007, at 21.37, Kenneth Whistler wrote:

> For conservative criteria for what to absolutely, positively guarantee 
> are in the never, never, ever category, I have started with:
> 1. cp != NFKC(cp)
> 2. cp has Pattern_Syntax property
> 3. cp has Pattern_White_Space property 4. cp has White_Space property 
> 5. cp has Variation_Selector property 6. cp has 
> Noncharacter_Code_Point property 7. cp has General_Category=Cf 
> (Unicode format controls) 8. cp has General_Category=Cc (ISO controls)

Idna-update mailing list
Idna-update at

More information about the Idna-update mailing list