idnabis WG documents
phoffman at imc.org
Fri Apr 18 01:59:12 CEST 2008
At 7:07 PM -0400 4/17/08, John C Klensin wrote:
>Paul, I clearly don't have any problems with the WG deciding on
>document structure. I'm even happy to issue one last version of
>"rationale" as draft-klensin-idnabis-issues if that would make
>you (or others) more comfortable.
That would make me happy, thanks.
>But, from my point of view,
>fwiw, we have lost considerable time and momentum in the charter
>I'd really like to avoid, if possible,
>losing even more in weeks of further navel-gazing over document
>organization and structure.
I promise not to gaze into your navel if you promise not to gaze into mine. :-)
>I'm not trying to pre-empt
>anything, but I'd like to urge that we spend as much time as is
>really needed getting structural arrangements like document
>organization and naming straightened out as is really needed,
>but no longer.
>In the interim, I think it is useful to record substantive
>conclusions (as distinct from procedural ones) that appear to
>have been reached during the charter discussion process in an
>I-D, however tentatively that is done, before we completely
>forget what was discussed. Do you disagree?
Nope, that's fine. For me, the highest priority for additions to your
documents is adding the regular expressions for the context-dependent
character rules. From our experience with finishing IDNA2003, I
suspect that this will take a larger number of round trips of
discussion than you expect.
More information about the Idna-update