Talking about changes from IDNA2003

Eric Brunner-Williams ebw at
Fri Apr 18 00:14:49 CEST 2008


I haven't (yet) gotten your original via the idna-update list, so I'm 
using John's reply.

I exchanged notes on the issue I've mentioned previously, the 2001 
tsconv draft, with Jian Kang Yao (CNNIC), who informed me that the issue 
(RFC3743) is just as needed now as it was in 2001.

I didn't notice it in your draft, though there is mention of it in the 
discussion of variants, in John's issues draft.

So I'm suggesting adding this to the list in the document.


John C Klensin wrote:
> --On Tuesday, 15 April, 2008 17:12 -0700 Paul Hoffman
> <phoffman at> wrote:
>> Greetings again. One of the first goals of the charter is for
>> the newly-formed (yay!) WG to decide in broad strokes which
>> features of the design team documents we want and don't want.
>> About a month ago, I posted the following:
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
>>> Internet-Drafts  directories.
>>> 	Title           : High-level Changes From IDNA2003 To IDNA200x
>>> 	Author(s)       : P. Hoffman
>>> 	Filename        : draft-hoffman-idna200x-topics-01.txt
>>> 	Pages           : 5
>>> 	Date            : 2008-03-13
>>> This document is a summary of what changes are embodied in the
>>> initial set of documents that are for IDNA200x.
>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>>> pics-01.txt
>> This document will *not* be an RFC. It is just meant for
>> discussion within the group, and will die a quiet death as we
>> move forwards with the real WG documents.
>> Before we dive into discussing the changes themselves: does
>> anyone have suggestions for changes to the list in the
>> document?
> Paul,
> Despite your "will not be an RFC" comment above, I was
> tentatively planning to fold your list into the introduction to
> the Rationale document since it is a start on an
> executive-summary-level overview of what is different.   Unless
> you, or others, object, that will be in the first WG version of
> that document, which I'm going to try to have out sometime next
> week.
> Of course, if I'm going to do that, fairly quick input about
> things that should be either added or dropped is even more
> important (although I expect that Rationale will go through
> several revisions so that the things I get wrong can be
> corrected).
> More broadly and for others, I'm trying to go through the
> pre-charter discussions now to capture what should be covered in
> Rationale and is not.  Left to my own devices, I will probably
> miss some things.   So, if anyone else would like to summarize
> topics that are not now covered, I would appreciate it... and at
> least get placeholders in for further discussion.
> best,
>      john
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at

More information about the Idna-update mailing list