We can separate the issues, as long as the result we end up with works. That is, we have to take account of the fact that the protocol itself is just one piece of a system. Suppose a change in the protocol works fine in isolation, but when we incorporate it into real working implementations everything gets screwed up -- we can't count that as success!<br>
<br><b><i>As far as end users are concerned, a page containing href="<a href="http://b%C3%BCcher.de/" target="_blank">http://Bücher.de</a>" will fail to link, whereas before it succeeded.</i><br></b><ol><li>That is, unless a local mapping is added.</li>
<li>That means, effectively, that every reasonable implementation will need to add a local mapping so as to not have disgruntled users.</li><li>But there is no standard mapping anymore as part of the protocol.</li><li>That means that different implementations can use different mappings.</li>
<li>Given no guidance, we know that they will.</li><li>That means we will end up with a very significant interoperability and security problem.</li></ol><br clear="all">Mark<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 14:33, Patrik Fältström <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:patrik@frobbit.se">patrik@frobbit.se</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On 24 feb 2009, at 23.18, Mark Davis wrote:<br>
<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="Ih2E3d">
According to IDNA2008, uppercase Unicode is simply illegal. href="<br>
</div><a href="http://xn--bcher-kva.de" target="_blank">http://Bücher.de</a> <<a href="http://b" target="_blank">http://b</a>%c3%<a href="http://bccher.de/" target="_blank">bccher.de/</a>>" would simply fail.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Mark, IDNA2008 is talking specifically about what characters you can use in the dns protocol (as U-labels, and encoded as A-labels). For me it is quite something different than saying whether a certain URI will fail or not.<br>
<br>
If we talk about domain names, lets talk about domain names. If we are to talk about URIs, lets talk about URIs.<br>
<br>
I have always been a supporter of your document that I have not seen any update to (the embryo of an I-D) on how to do mapping and use of IDNs in URIs.<br>
<br>
But URIs are not domain names. To be able to move forward, I think we should separate the various issues here.<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
Patrik<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>