Yoneya-san's proposal works for me. It's a good compromise -- simple but provides just enough context to the usage, and from various comments sounds like it works for everyone else too.<div><br></div><div>=wil<br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 11:03 PM, John C Klensin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:klensin@jck.com">klensin@jck.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
<br>
--On Sunday, July 26, 2009 17:04 +1000 Wil Tan<br>
<div class="im"><<a href="mailto:wil@cloudregistry.net">wil@cloudregistry.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> I'm fine with this, though I'd prefer "dirt simple" to be a<br>
> plain "True". The advantage over (1) is that it allows room<br>
> for explanation and warning to registries and developers, and<br>
> over your proposed algorithm is that it doesn't prohibit<br>
> labels that otherwise contain all Latin characters (decorated<br>
> or not.)<br>
<br>
</div>Wil,<br>
<br>
I have been silent on this for the last few days because I'm not<br>
expert enough on Japanese (not expert at all) to evaluate<br>
whether a given ruleset provides enough flexibility. However,<br>
<br>
* I thought we had agreed on Yoneya-san's proposal in April and<br>
wonder if the additional discussion on this topic is a good use<br>
of time.<br>
<br>
* When making this PVALID is suggested, the conversation needs<br>
to shift, at least in part, from the needs of Japanese to the<br>
issues associated with having the character appear in<br>
non-Japanese (or non-CJK) contexts. In that context, while I<br>
claim zero expertise in Japanese, I believe I'm adequately<br>
competent to have opinions about a few "European" scripts and,<br>
due to other work, to have competent opinions about visual<br>
perceptions. On that basis, and for the reasons below, while I<br>
don't have very strong opinions about the details of the<br>
contextual rule, I'm strongly opposed to making this character<br>
PVALID.<br>
<br>
Generalizing a bit leads me back to Harald's comment and perhaps<br>
a guideline for thinking about these things. Katakana Middle<br>
Dot is a "Po" punctuation character. We have banned _all_ of<br>
those, modulo particular necessary exceptions -- a subject I<br>
hope we don't have to reopen. The issue here isn't using<br>
CONTEXTO to add restrictions to a letter that would normally be<br>
PVALID but using it to permit a character that would otherwise<br>
be DISALLOWED to be used in limited contexts.<br>
<br>
I suggest that a useful meta-rule for thinking about this and<br>
other ordinarily DISALLOWED punctuation characters is that the<br>
only basis for allowing them is an argument that they are<br>
sufficiently required in a particular context to justify an<br>
exception and that they should therefore be CONTEXTx with the<br>
rule reflecting that particular context and that context only,<br>
not general discussions about where the character would be "safe<br>
enough". If nothing else, discussions about where some<br>
punctuation character might be "safe" takes us back into a<br>
discussion about whether we should DISALLOW punctuation<br>
generally or whether we need to start a character-by-character<br>
analysis for punctuation characters. I'm pretty sure we don't<br>
want to go there.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
john<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>
</div>