support of metadata
harald at alvestrand.no
Thu Sep 17 15:49:46 CEST 2009
jean-michel bernier de portzamparc wrote:
> 2009/9/17 Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no
> <mailto: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" intranet.
> 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?
Not a problem at all. What you do in your local intranet is entirely
More information about the Idna-update