Standardizing on IDNA 2003 in the URL Standard
John C Klensin
klensin at jck.com
Sat Aug 24 16:49:34 CEST 2013
Excellent. Have a good vacation; let's talk after the 3rd.
--On Saturday, August 24, 2013 14:40 +0200 Mark Davis ☕
<mark at macchiato.com> wrote:
> There's been a flurry of activity on this list. I'm on
> vacation, and won't be able to respond much for a
> , b
> make just a couple of brief comments.
> With reference to your comments below, I think that many
> people's views have evolved in the last four years. I'm sure
> that Unicode Consortium would be glad to work together on
> improving UTF46. As you say, we are in a bit of a chicken and
> egg situation between registries and browsers, so a clearer
> path forward to IDNA2008 would be great. (And in retrospect, I
> so wish that IDNA2003 had been built along the IDNA2008
> architecture—would have saved us all so much pain!)
> The key is an effective
> transition plan
> for #2/#3
> I put out some strawman ideas on this list, but clearly there
> needs to be more discussion. I think everyone recognizes that
> we won't get to zero "breaking" IDNA2003 URLs; the goal should
> be to get to a small enough number that the major players feel
> comfortable flipping the switch on the remaining ones.
> Back on Sept 9.
More information about the Idna-update