support of metadata

[Elisabeth Blanconil]

Jean-Michel,

I must say I do prefer FE73 rather than PRIVATE USE codes. This is
because PRIVATE USE codes are within the ASCII limits (what may create
confusion with poorly designed implementations) and may poorly print
if it was actually printed. FE73 would react more clearly. IMHO the
best would be to have an ISO 10646 SDO area reserved at the IUCG
reference center taken on the UNASSIGNED area. I am sure that
French.European majuscules (as quoted by Martin Dürst) are not the
only metadata that we would need to carry throught codepoints.

Elisabeth Blanconil

2009/9/14 jean-michel bernier de portzamparc <jmabdp at gmail.com>:
> Anyway, my problem is _not_ to know what IDNA will be able to do or not. My
> interest is to make sure that IDNAPLUS is able to match users' expectations,
> and also to be 100% IDNA conformant. Obviously, IDNAPLUS will do things IDNA
> will not do. What I try to make sure is that the difference is only :
>
> 1. to support IDNA2003 upper-cases in U-Label
> 2. keeping PRIVATE USE ONE and PRIVATE USE TWO PVALID as PVALID, i.e.
> respecting Unicode's respect for users.