Eric Brunner-Williams ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Thu Dec 3 00:40:01 CET 2009

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> ...
> Even if this is a rhetorical question, I'll bite.  It's because the IETF 
> makes decisions by rough consensus and running code.  Rough consensus is 
> among informed participants as well as experts and people in certain 
> positions of authority or responsibility.  Running code certainly brings 
> in browser/client implementation history and current client 
> implementation concerns.  It is not only operators of the countries 
> where those languages are most spoken, that have collateral effects from 
> the status of the characters of those languages in IDNA.

It was just this assertion, in late 2001, that allowed the IDNA (2003) 
WG to ignore the input from Chinese engineers.

That resulted in a later separate document, and a contemporaneous 
second, correctly functioning, for local definition of correct, name 
space, which persists to this day.

At some point, the tension between 2826 and someone's broken code has 
to be resolved, and continuing to favor someone's broken code over 
2826 has a downside.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list