06FD and 06FE should be PVALID for Sindhi
phoffman at imc.org
Wed Apr 2 00:16:30 CEST 2008
At 9:25 PM +0100 4/1/08, Michael Everson wrote:
>That is fine. The important thing is that they are PVALID; whether
>that happens with a change from "So" to "Lo" is irrelevant so long
>as there is an exceptions list.
It is probably quite relevant to the IETF, which updates its
standards *much* more slowly than the Unicode Consortium. It is also
possibly relevant to the Sindhi community, given that the miscasting
in the Unicode Standard could affect other standards in the future.
If we (for a value of "we" that includes active Unicode Consortium
people) want IDNA200x to rely heavily on the Unicode Standard for our
decisions, then the Unicode Standard should be corrected wherever
possible instead of asking all the protocols to make exceptions. If
we want to view this more as a process where the Unicode Standard is
taken as mostly-but-not-completely correct, then relying on other
standards to have actively-maintained exception lists is reasonable.
I prefer the former; others might want the latter. But we need to
decide sooner rather than later which model is most appropriate. From
the messages on the thread so far, these characters seem like
excellent test cases.
More information about the Idna-update