is IDNA the ML-DNS we wait for ?

[jefsey]

Dear Vint,
As I explained it, prior to sending this mail, I circulated its draft 
to many people round the world and took their remarks into 
consideration, specially @large members who like those of 
france at large and Multilinc translate "@large" as "an Internet 
co-owner", and MAAYA Members.

The IDNA issue is a key priority for the continuation of the IETF 
technology as the network technology of the world digital ecosystem 
(WDE). If the IETF cannot match the world's expectations in that area 
it must say so now, so others can consider alternative solutions 
before we see different  uncoordinated local solutions developed and deployed.

  >At 22:37 09/05/2008, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
  >What matters, I think, is what contemporary communities *are* 
using or might reasonably be inferred to want to use if available, for domain
names.

Maybe, what really matters are:

(1) the political world consensus for a multilingual Internet for a 
people centered multilingual society of information,

(2) the universal resentment at being told what one is supposed to 
want.  People accept being told by others as to what they can only 
do, if they understand exactly why.

The world expects a Multilingual DNS that works for every language 
and every script the way the DNS works for English and ASCII. Let us 
call this the ML-DNS specification. It is very simple, terse, and clear.

Question (A): does this IETF WG-IDNABIS seek to document an IDNA 
based ML-DNS in order to be ready for testing by Dec. 2008 (Y/N)?

Question (B): If A is "N",  what are the clearly defined and 
committed detailed specifications of the Nov. 2008 IETF deliverable?

Among the points to be clarified in these specifications are:
1- will it be mainly focussed towards Mobiles, Browsers, 
Applications, or the three of them?
2- will it be phishing proof at every DN level?
3- which scripts or charset and languages will be supported? or will 
it be transparent to scripts choices?
4- will it be IDN2003 compatible?
5- will it strive to be future ML-DNS interoperable?
6- why was the IDNA option chosen as the best way to support ML-DNS 
vs. other possibilities?
7- will Microsoft, Google, and Firefox fully and identically support 
it? Will they also permit the support of any other ML-DNS proposition?
8 - will it support easily additional symbols such as logos?
9 - will it stay ISO 3166 conformant?

Thank you for your committed answer.
jfc