Issues lists and the "preprocessing" topic

[Mark Davis]

I'm a bit surprised. My impression is that in general people distinctly did
not want to see a preprocessing document as part of IDNAbis, and that John
and others didn't want to even see it as a separate IETF document.

I'm not sure why you can't see the document. Can you try again, and is
anyone else having trouble?

Mark


On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 8:47 PM, Patrik Fältström <patrik at frobbit.se> wrote:

>
> On 21 aug 2008, at 01.59, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> > Based on comments from John and others at the meeting, however, it
> > appears
> > that the working group is fundamentally not interested in having a
> > common
> > specification for a mapping phase be part of the IDNAbis, and that
> > it would
> > be better done by organizations like Unicode or others. Based on
> > that, I
> > modified the draft at http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfqr8rd5_51c3nrskcx
> > , and
> > submitted it to the UTC for consideration.
>
>
> A few things:
>
> I have not seen this consensus you refer to. The contrary. I see
> support for such a document.
>
> I personally support such a document in the IETF, and have told you
> and everyone I have been asked.
>
> The URI you have above does not resolve. I get back a 404.
>
> Regarding earlier versions of this document, I think it is a fine
> start, but too bound to "web based applications". I.e. ok as such, but
> if applicable to more protocols than web/http, it could be more
> generic. But see comments on in what order the wg have cycles for
> working on multiple documents and multiple threads.
>
>    Patrik
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20080827/e124b6b7/attachment.htm