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

Patrik Fältström patrik at
Thu Jun 14 20:00:34 CEST 2007

On 14 jun 2007, at 10.37, 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  
> 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?

Please suggest more codepoints that you Unicode people know will  
*ALWAYS* (and I really really mean that) will never ever change.

Of course I as editor would like to see as many codepoints as  
possible here, but...we all know "bugs" in the Unicode tables have  
been found.

I don't like the current situation either. But I am personally not  
the one that bet my house on more scripts than what is now suggested.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list