WG Review: Internationalized Domain Name (idn)
Paul Hoffman
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Thu Feb 28 23:52:21 CET 2008
At 4:22 PM -0500 2/28/08, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> writes:
>
>
> Paul> The WG will start by finding consensus on the type of
> Paul> document or documents it wants as its output, most likely
> Paul> using the current work described above as a basis.
>
>Paul, I appreciate what you're trying to do, but I have a bit of a
>problem with your rewording. The current charter is intended to start
>off with a gating consensus call. The WG either decides to base its
>work on the existing documents or it needs to come back to the entire
>community with a recharter explaining what it is going to do.
Boy, I didn't read it that way. I see nothing in the charter that
calls for such a gating decision, and the first milestone is:
>Mar 08: WG Last Call for Overview/Rationale document
If you want some gating, you need to do it before that.
>What you propose writes a rather large blank check to the WG.
That was not my intention.
>I agree
>the WG should be given freedom to organize its documents as it likes.
>I don't think the WG should be given the freedom to go off in an
>initial direction we've never heard of without a community wide sanity
>check.
Fully agree. I don't think what I wrote above gives the WG that,
given the rest of the charter. The charter already narrowly scopes
the possible direction:
>This WG is chartered to untie IDNA from specific versions of Unicode
>using algorithms that define validity based on Unicode properties.
Mind you, I don't agree that this is the best direction for the IETF,
but I'm in the small minority in my thinking, so I am going along
with the rest of the group. But I don't see how, given that very
definitive statement earlier in the charter, that the WG can go off
in an initial direction very far from where the current documents go.
>Any chance we could work on wording that gives organizational
>flexibility without being as broad as you propose?
You could extend it to:
The WG will start by finding consensus on the type of document or
documents it wants as its output, most likely using the current work
described above as a basis, as long as the direction of the document
set adheres to the rest of this charter.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list