Fwd: key questions [was the re-opening thread]
jean-michel bernier de portzamparc
jmabdp at gmail.com
Tue Feb 9 16:06:16 CET 2010
As requested by Patrik Fälström, I copy these questions to the WG list.
> > At 23:15 08/02/2010, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> >> Part from standing behind what Vint wrote in his response, let me answer
> more directly the questions from Lisa.
> >> I am a developer/designer of mostly web based software for management of
> domain names, web sites, email services and what not. I will (and want to be
> able to) in my interfaces first of all be pretty sure over what data comes
> to me as a "server". I.e. I want to know what the end user really wanted to
> give me (I did explicitly not say "typed" here for reasons I hope people
> > I understand that you are on the server end. You are related to a user
> and you do not know if this is a direct relation, or it goes through a
> bowser, an iPhone, a Client, a User Agent. Correct? Yet, you also consider
> the case where you may have to develop the User Client/Agent and you control
> things down to the user's fingers?
> >> Now, if the web browser (if the web browser was used) did some trick and
> converted some characters, then I do not get the characters the end user
> typed (for example), but regardless of this, I will do whatever I want to do
> to make the end user happy. Exactly what that implies will differ depending
> on context. Is this domain name management or management of a web site, or
> the management of email addresses or sites?
> > So you mean that the reference is what the user wants to achieve? And
> your understanding of what he wants to achieve will depend on different
> context inputs, and obviously of the protocol being used and the task to be
> performed? Also from the zone?
> >> Is this mapping, if applied, to be implemented in the browser or in the
> web server? I would like to get as raw data as possible, without having the
> browser doing anything, so that I know as much as possible on the server
> side. So I can "help" users the same way browsers today "help" users by
> adding ".COM" TLD if that is not added. "guessing" I think it can be called.
> > I understand this is in the case where you have to develop the user
> client interface?
> >> And if HTTP/Web browser is not in use, but instead for example an iPhone
> application that then interact over JSON/Netstring/TCP with some server API,
> then I can in a more direct way control what is sent to the server (if I
> also write the client). I will only be confused (possibly) over the mapping
> that is in the operating system / user interface libraries.
> > OK. Did you think of a method for you to clarify that possible confusion?
> >> All of this might sounds like if it will make things messier for the
> user, but in reality I do not think so. *NO* developer have the interest in
> making this messier for the user. And exactly what it means to make it
> easier for the user depends on context. Very much. Specifically when we have
> so many protocols and environments and contexts where domain names are in
> > As I said, I am not that much competent in Web level applications, rather
> with user level interapplications. Which documentation do you use to
> identify how you should understand what to do with a given protocol, in a
> given environment, for a given context?
> >> Saying just "no mapping at registration time" is not good enough for me.
> What about if you want to change the holder or adminc or techc of a domain?
> Should you do mapping then, if the domain name is typed by the user or not?
> Is a transfer of a domain name "registration time"?
> > Good point. What if the Registry sotfware does not consider
> holder/adminc/techc and uses a different system? What is the Registry only
> use local script/language interfaces?
> >> No, I rather see that I as a developer can do whatever I want to make
> things easier for the users, and that might include that I try to do some
> mappings of codepoints that are not PVALID, or complete changes of some
> things that might be domain names (hard to know sometimes) to something that
> are domain names (different separators between labels for example).
> > and French/Latin language majuscule support?
> >> So to answer your question Lisa: No, it is not clear what characters are
> suggested to be mapped, but we do not even know where or who has the
> responsibility to do the mapping -- if any. In the case of HTTP, is that
> done in the web browser or on the server side, in the cgi?
> > I have some difficulty here: how can an IDN be mapped on the server side?
> Should it not necessarily be mapped on the user side so it can be properly
> resolved to that very server?
> >> For example how do a web browser know whether the ajax / json call is to
> be "a registration" or not? A situation when mapping should explicitly not
> occur? It can not, and because of that browsers should not include any
> mapping at all. Ever.
> >> That is one view, and of course you can find the arguments the other way
> around as well.
> > I agree with your position. Would you know of an online
> document/discussion on this matter, or a con/pro list?
> >> And this is why I think the current mapping document is as good as we
> can get it -- and why I think (like Pete) TR46 is too strong. Because it is
> very wrong to explicitly ask for mappings the way it does.
> > Do you know if other possibilities have been expressed by W3C, or SDOs?
> >> What *might* be ok and good to do is to say what codepoints can be
> mapped in various contexts to other characters, but I think for example the
> definition of bundles in the IANA registries to some degree do that. When
> not mapping from PVALID to other PVALID of course. So that people know that
> IF one work in a specific context (certain language for example), THEN it
> MIGHT be interesting to map from A to B.
> > Do you consider the possibility of mapping on a TLD basis?
> >> So I would say the mapping document we have is good.
> > How would you qualify it? a reminder, a protection against too stringent
> or lax behaviours, a guidance, a reference, a open link to further work?
> > Is its informational nature not a problem while it completes a standard
> track work?
> > Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Idna-update