<html>
<body>
At 02:27 02/10/2011, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""><font face="times new roman">The
third choice, of course, was to maintain backwards compatibility with
2003 for all characters in Unicode 3.2, and just extend the same
principles to new characters. That is a much easier migration
path...</font><br><br>
We've seen this before. XML 1.1 only had a small breaking-compatibility
changes, but those changes were enough to completely doom
it.</blockquote><br>
Mark,<br><br>
Your "backwards" compatibility word is correct in terms of
usage (your part as Unicode), but is architecurally incorrect because
what you actually want is "forwards" IDNA2003 compatibility,
with extensions to Unicode 6.1, etc. And this is exactly what IDNA2008
permits but has not documented yet.<br><br>
IDNA2003 actually tested a bundle of different concepts. This test shown
that most of these concepts were OK but that the bundling introduced
layer violations. The operational IDNA2003 (your need) works.The
architectural IDNA2003 (the IETF and users' need) does not
scale.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""><font face="times new roman">But
as you say, that was not the rough consensus of the
WG.</font></blockquote><br>
To the countrary. And this is why I pushed for a quick consensus
and for working on IDNA2010 (as the technical use of
IDNA2008) and then on IDNA2012 (as the general usage of
IDNA2008).<br><br>
Why? you may recall that after the LCs the AD started to raise good
architectural questions leading the IESG to not accept RFC 5895 as a WG
deliverable. These questions and their solutions were of the essence but
... outside the WG charter. <br><br>
It was then an absolute necessity that we establish IDNA2008, so we might
work on the following steps, rather than keeping discussing along our
limited charter.<br><br>
As a result, RFC 5895 was not discussed by the WG as it should have had.
Therefore, an IDNA2003 section was not included which should have
documented how developpers could develop a scalable "IDNA2003
interface" (i.e. a "forewards" adaptibillity at [or with]
the user application and an IDNA2008 interface with the Internet DNS).
Such an "IDNA2003 layer" is one of the multiple layers (ML) the
IDNA2008 conformant ML-DNS should support.<br><br>
Best.<br>
jfc<br><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>