Stop me if I've misunderstood...

Elisabeth Blanconil eblanconil at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 14:03:16 CEST 2009


2009/7/9 Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com>:
>> The recipe for chaos lies in having multiple different URIs (and
>> parent domain names) that don't compare equal on a string
>> basis but that do map to the same domain name
>
> Hmm ;-)  Let's see "microsoft.com", Microsoft.com, MICROSOFT.COM, MicroSoft.Com, MiCrOsOfT.CoM, I'm not gonna list 512 variations of "Microsoft" that don't compare equal in binary form, yet resolve to the same domain name.  The same is true for IDNA2003 strings.  Despite the mapping step, they can be consistently compared correctly.  (and would still, 'cept for the 4 breaking changes in IDNAbis).
>
> The problem isn't having different binary forms that compare the same, the problem is not having consistent mappings for that comparison.  If everyone uses the same comparison rules, like ASCII DNS, then it's just a simple function call to check equality.  If you do it a lot, like in a database, then just store the canonical form.

I am afraid this is an American Engineer idyosincrasy. The remark only
makes sense in a cultural/technical environment of which the
orthotyprography does not make any semantic difference between upper
and lower cases. Up to now users believed that this bugged conception
was an Internet feature and the whole thing survived.

In not consider a proper support of the French language
orthotypography and semiotic, then in personnally challenging its
participating French users, this WG has forced them to show that in
the French language case this could be worked out differently. Not
through a change in the internet, but as a basic architectural feature
that everyone could use. That also made possible for the Internet to
support the Intersem without any change - including the Wii and
Microsoft Natal product (cf. Pete's document).

So, due to the simplicity of the process, it would be surprising that
the news does not spread (it actually already has, as you know) . So,
the mission of this WG as defined by its Charter has clarified because
its network environment has clarified - this is why france at large
always supported the Charter. It is not any more how to support IDNA
on the Internet, but how to support IDNA within the "Internet Plus"
multitechnology environment. This means when users "interplug" a
Plugged Layers User System between their applications and the network,
immediately getting access, to myriad of possible presentations and by
the same token thousands of use classes, this WG has to make sure the
IDNA stays the system of reference. Otherwise there is no more
Internet.

The mapping document does a very good job at permitting to consider
all this in a stabilized way. The UI layer is a good answer to the
problem of having:
- for some to interface the Internet with added features only for
their http connections
- for others accessing the Internet Plus layers (we identifed the
"interapplication" and the "pseudo-network" layers supporting the
presentation layer - may be discussion may lead to add more?) and
using the DN Pile.
- and for others other Internet Plus more innovative and added layers,
presentations, contexts, technologies.

I will shut-up now, but I thought you needed to get this before we go
for vacations as Jefsey requested it.

Elisabeth Blanconil


More information about the Idna-update mailing list