WG Review: Internationalized Domain Names in
Applications (Revised) (idnabis)
vint at google.com
Wed Apr 9 00:42:01 CEST 2008
the method of specification of the permitted character space made
normative reference to Unicode 3.2
we are trying to escape that kind of binding in the future.
On Apr 8, 2008, at 5:33 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> writes:
>> It is believed that the first attempt in 2003 did not adequately deal
>> with several key issues including Unicode version-independence.
> Could someone remind me why IDNA2003 couldn't be updated in a minimal
> fashion to reference Unicode 5.1 instead of 3.2? It's not like it
> is a
> huge amount of work for every new Unicode version.
> Remember, the IDNA WG in 2003 chose consciously to reference a
> particular Unicode version, for reasons that still are valid. It
> happen by accident.
More information about the Idna-update