I agree with Ken and John, after listening to this discussion. There is no really functional difference (as I said before), and I think the conceptually simpler option should take the field.<br><br>Mark<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 12:11 PM, John C Klensin <<a href="mailto:klensin@jck.com">klensin@jck.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
--On Friday, 02 May, 2008 11:22 -0700 Kenneth Whistler<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><<a href="mailto:kenw@sybase.com">kenw@sybase.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Frank Ellermann said:<br>
><br>
>> That is the definition at the moment. I see UNASSIGNED<br>
>> as an invitation to abuse where it is about code points<br>
>> that will be never allowed.<br>
>><br>
>> I hope to get cases like u+2705 into the DISALLOWED set,<br>
>> where they can't attract abuse attempts.<br>
><br>
> Can you provide a clear example of what kind of abuse<br>
> you envision?<br>
><br>
> As I see it, U+2705, under the rules proposed here,<br>
> cannot be in an IDN in 2008, or in 2018, or even if<br>
> encoded as some kind of symbol dingbat in a distant<br>
> version of Unicode in 2028, in an IDN in 2028.<br>
><br>
> I just don't see the marginal value here of trying<br>
> to take some specific ranges of unassigned code points<br>
> in Unicode and explicitly designating them in IDNA 2008<br>
> as more toxic than ordinary unassigned code points. It<br>
> just seems to invite confusion about the status of<br>
> code points in the table -- and I view confusion as<br>
> the more likely cause of attracting abuse, rather than<br>
> anything specific about U+2705.<br>
</div>>...<br>
<br>
FWIW, I agree with Ken. We should keep unassigned code points<br>
as UNASSIGNED (regardless of whatever else we might think we<br>
know about them) and maintain the position that only code points<br>
that have actually been bound to characters can be DISALLOWED<br>
(or anything other than UNASSIGNED). That keeps things simple<br>
and easy to understand, and avoids all sorts of "opportunities"<br>
with edge cases that no one has really argued that we need.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
john<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Idna-update mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Idna-update@alvestrand.no">Idna-update@alvestrand.no</a><br>
<a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update" target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark