support of metadata
jean-michel bernier de portzamparc
jmabdp at gmail.com
Thu Sep 17 14:15:51 CEST 2009
2009/9/17 Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no>
> If you want to build your own intranet, and call it "IDNAPLUS", you are
> free to use PRIVATE USE codes in whatever way you like. That's why they are
> called PRIVATE USE.
> There's no reason to expect that the Internet will change to accomodate
> interoperation with that intranet. That's the problem of the "IDNAPLUS"
Except that PRIVATE USE ONE and TWO are DISALLOWED.
This is why I say that the only two differences are PRIVATE USE ONE and TWO
being allowed (like in IDNA2003) and U-Label being permitted to carry
uppercases like in IDNA2003.
Not my problem.
Then your position is not my problem either. I mean we identified that there
is no conflict between us, just that we are othogonal. If I take the
protocol and table document and just change these two points and call it
IDNAPLUS, explaining how these two points can be blocked in order to only be
IDNA conformant, I can publish them as IDNAPLUS RFC? This then should not be
a problem for you?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Idna-update