New version, draft-faltstrom-idnabis-tables-02.txt, available

Harald Alvestrand harald at
Thu Jun 14 10:42:04 CEST 2007

Gervase Markham wrote:
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>> A reasonable behaviour for a reasonable software implementor of 
>> software that won't be upgraded in 5 years would be:
>> - Give a syntax error for attempts to type in IDNs with NEVER characters
>> - Permit all others (you can't be sure where they will end up)
>> OTOH, an online web-app provider might choose to regard all of MAYBE 
>> NOT as a syntax error, and bet on his ability to upgrade the software 
>> in the case where a MAYBE NOT character migrates to MAYBE YES or ALWAYS.
> There seem to me to be an extremely large number of characters in 
> MAYBE YES and MAYBE NO, which corresponds to a great deal of 
> uncertainty. I agree with Mark that this seems highly undesirable.
> Is it anticipated that more character sets will move into 
> Stable/Favored status before the release, thereby reducing this 
> uncertainty? Or will it be reduced some other way?
Can you recommend specific scripts that you think should have the 
"Stable" status?

The fact that the CJK scripts are in MAYBE YES is probably the biggest 
contributor to the sheer number of characters there. But I have no idea 
whether there are known issues with them that should be solved first.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list