LDH-label terminology
Eric Brunner-Williams
ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Sat Jul 26 20:19:14 CEST 2008
> ...
> In another article you mentioned RFC 2673 for the difference
> between "binary" and "octets". IMHO we can ignore RFC 2673
> for IDN. The SPF folks also ignored it for RFC 4408 back in
> 2005.
> ...
If you think the SPF requirement wasn't octet-aligned, and the unit of
store two or more contiguous allocations of 8 bits, then your opinion is
interesting.
If you think the IDN requirement is both octet-aligned, and the unit of
store necessarily 8 bits, for all label types, then your opinion is very
interesting.
Look, I don't much care, other than to have suggested that the taxonomy
of labels of type data could be consistent with 2929, and that text
labels are a proper subset of binary labels. I don't much care that the
binary label experiment didn't pan out better, its just a data type to
be correct about, or gloss over because <insert reason here>.
There was a reason the 4408 authors ignored anything other than
single-byte characters, they weren't wrestling with u-labels.
Oh well.
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list