Unicode 5.2 -> 6.0

Andrew Sullivan ajs at shinkuro.com
Thu Oct 14 23:20:43 CEST 2010


On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:01:39PM -0700, Mark Davis ? wrote:
> 
> *1) DISALLOWED => PVALID*
> *
> *
> 
> *U+0CF1 KANNADA SIGN JIHVAMULIYA*
> *U+0CF2 KANNADA SIGN UPADHMANIYA*
> 
> 
> These don't cause any problem. With each new version of Unicode, this
> happens with thousands of characters; all the new ones. Having IDNA2008 just
> follow Unicode is the right thing to do.

Is that right?  The new ones should all be moving from UNASSIGNED into
PVALID, shouldn't they?  Without thinking about it for very long, it
seems right to me that it's less of a big deal to move from DISALLOWED
to PVALID, because something that used to be valid doesn't thereby
become invalid.  But note that all the deployed software with the old
DISALLOWED rule simply won't allow lookups of them.  (Of course, the
way RFC 5891 is written, they won't look up UNASSIGNED code points
either, so this test collapses, I guess.)

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list