Unicode 5.2 -> 6.0

[Patrik Fältström]

No problem. When looking at my message again, I see I should have repeated what Ken wrote. But I wrote my email at 1AM in the morning which is not always the best...

   Patrik

On 15 okt 2010, at 00.32, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:

> Sorry, I was looking at (C) in your original message, not (C) in Ken's
> message (which is the same as my C2).
> 
> Mark
> 
> *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
> 
> 
> 2010/10/14 Mark Davis ☕ <mark at macchiato.com>
> 
>> What you are saying isn't quite specific enough. There are multiple
>> alternatives for C:
>> 
>> C1 Add to clause G:
>> U+0CF1 KANNADA SIGN JIHVAMULIYA => DISALLOWED
>> U+0CF2 KANNADA SIGN UPADHMANIYA => DISALLOWED
>> 
>> C2 Add to clause G
>> U+19DA NEW TAI LUE THAM DIGIT ONE => PVALID
>> 
>> C3 Do both C2 and C3.
>> 
>> 
>> I think the correct course of action is C2.
>> 
>> Mark
>> 
>> *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
>> 
>> 
>> 2010/10/14 Patrik Fältström <patrik at frobbit.se>
>> 
>> 
>>> On 14 okt 2010, at 23.31, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Please see my long response just posted on this thread. This isn't
>>>> a decision between A) or B). It is a decision between
>>>> A) or B) or C), and I think C) is the correct answer.
>>> 
>>> I have no problem being convinced I am wrong, and that (c) is the correct
>>> answer.
>>> 
>>> I did think carefully whether I should propose any solution at all, which
>>> I did, which directly created a discussion, and counter proposal.
>>> 
>>> We use "rough consensus" in the IETF, and given I now see rough consensus
>>> is "alternative C", I will start creating an I-D reflecting exactly this.
>>> 
>>>  Thanks Ken!
>>> 
>>>     Patrik
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Idna-update mailing list
>>> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
>>> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>>> 
>> 
>>