[OT] Re: support of metadata
jean-michel bernier de portzamparc
jmabdp at gmail.com
Thu Sep 17 14:35:43 CEST 2009
there is seemingly a fundamental misunderstanding between multilinguists and
you: we do _not_ care about natural languages. We are only interested in a
complete support of Unicode that you did remove when lowercasing punycode
entries, without providing a mechanism to restore the Unicode information on
an end to end basis.
IDNA is now entropic, it was not before. This is not something we can live
2009/9/17 John C Klensin <klensin at jck.com>
> The reality is that Jean-Michel's idea of appropriating a few
> DISALLOWED or contextually-prohibited Unicode characters
Using DISALLOWED makes the IDNAPLUS more robust, if the IETF does not change
their mind. Using UNASSIGNED is chancy if Unicode does not want to
cooperate. Using contextually-prohibibited Unicode points looks more like a
hack and plainly shows that IETF and Unicode not only did not care about the
users demands, but opposed them. This is why I consider that this point is
not off context.
But, unless someone comes up with a
> way to look at, e.g.,
> and know, definitively, whether the first two labels are
> "English", "French", "German", etc., it just isn't workable in
What is needed along with the Internet RFC 1958 end to end rule is that if
p33.a22.example.net and P33.A22.example.net the receiving hosts receives the
respectively as p33.a22.example.net and P33.A22.example.net (as they
currently do) and can locally discrimiate, or better they can be resolved as
p33.a22.example.net and as xn--33-abc.xn--22.bcd.example.net because before
lowercasing the entries punycode will change P33.a22.example.net in ?p33.?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Idna-update