IDNA document set - Last Call review
Harald Alvestrand
harald at alvestrand.no
Mon Aug 24 16:28:17 CEST 2009
>
> publication of this set not be stored by the IANA?
>
>
> IDNA BIDI
>
> * 1.1. Advisable or not to specify "when U-labels" instead of "labels" ?
>
The first paragraph says that the document is about U-labels. This
should not need repeating.
> * 1.4. BIDI properties come from Unicode. They might not be
> complete or could be completed in the future. What then?
>
See section 7.2, "This memo does not propose a solution for this problem".
> * 2. A replacement for the RFC 3454 BIDI rule: it would probably
> be good to indicate the applying order.
>
The 6 conditions can be checked in any order. All must be satisfied in
order to make the test pass; different implementations may find that
different checking orders make the code more or less efficient.
> * 7. Does that restriction mean that telephone numbers cannot be
> registered in BIDI zones?
>
If the registry desires that domain names behave sensibly, yes; if the
registry only desires that domain names pass the test, no. There are no
inter-label tests.
> * 8. IANA considerations. Same remark as in the Protocol case.
>
The Unicode Consortium does not make changes to published versions of
its standards; I believe we can trust them to keep version 5.1 available
for a while.
> Moreover, the section above then states: "the determination of
> validity for any string depends on the Unicode BIDI property values,
> which are not declared immutable by the Unicode Consortium."
>
>
See section 7.2.
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list