In order to be able to handle the mappings document, should the WG choose to put it forward, I would like to understand as part of this discussion:<br> - implementation intentions -- who plans to implement mappings and in what context (e.g user typing? user click on URL?)<br>
- clarity -- is it clear which characters are suggested to be mapped, e.g. so that we understand the difference from what characters were required to be mapped in IDNA2003<br><br>thanks,<br>Lisa<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Vint Cerf <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Please see the attached, rather longish PDF. It is intended to try to move the discussion forward on the matter of the mappings question.<br>
<br>
The WG has previously agreed that:<br>
<br>
1. there will be no mapping in the registration process. labels in registered domain names must be in U-label or A-label form, satisfying all the validity criteria of the now-adopted normative IDNA2008 documents.<br>
<br>
2. The mapping discussion emerging from IDNABIS should not be normative<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
Vint<br>
<br>
</font><br><br>
<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>
<br></blockquote></div><br>