Historic scripts as MAYBE?
phoffman at imc.org
Mon Apr 28 05:39:45 CEST 2008
At 7:42 PM -0700 4/27/08, Mark Davis wrote:
>True, but remember that there is no bright line with "archaic/historic".
I took inclusion in Chapter 14 of TUS to be a bright enough line.
Maybe you're saying it isn't.
>If you mean: "nobody uses it", then no script qualifies!
I do not mean that at all. I mean "another qualified standards body
has defined it for us".
>I have gotten no reply back from my message of 5 days ago ("Re:
>Stability of valid IDN labels"). Without some concrete user
>scenerios making a compelling case, all we have a bald statement
>about unnamed "application creators". That is hardly the way to go
>about doing a specification.
We disagree. Patrik's statements about what a developer would want (a
stable list of what is prohibited so they can filter) seems logical
to me. You might code differently, of course. If we go down a path
where we require that developers code in a certain fashion, that
makes the spec much more fragile.
More information about the Idna-update