Consensus Call Tranche 8 Summary - Addendum
Kenneth Whistler
kenw at sybase.com
Wed Oct 22 21:52:35 CEST 2008
John said:
> Thanks. I will save this text in case there is agreement that
> it should be used. I believe that the first questions are the
> ones that Andrew stated implicitly: whether we believe Rationale
> should evolve in this direction and, then, whether this type of
> comment and pointer is the optimal (or only) one to make.
>
> I also wonder whether the definition of a "technical character"
> is well understood within the community that might be reading
> that document.
See suggested clarification below.
--Ken
>
> best,
> john
>
>
> --On Wednesday, 22 October, 2008 17:36 +0200 Mark Davis
> <mark at macchiato.com> wrote:
> > [In 4.4. Registry Restrictions, after the first paragraph,
> > add:]
> >
> > Note: In constructing registry policies that disallow
> > historic or technical characters
--> characters used in historic writing systems or characters
whose use is restricted to specialized, highly technical
contexts,
> > to reduce opportunities for confusion,
> > some relevant information may be found at [Unicode-Exclusions]
> > and [Unicode-Security].
It could be restrung to read better, but that is a more
self-explanatory phrasing for the characters Mark has
in mind.
--Ken
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list