Hasty attempt to create an IDN WG (Was: WG Review: Internationalized Domain Name (idn)

[Lisa Dusseault]

On Mar 3, 2008, at 5:38 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

>> - Separate requirements for valid IDNs at registration time, vs. at
>> resolution time
>
> This means casting in stone one specific approach, and a dangerous
> one...... And the discussions on the existing
> idna-update list show that the decision of exclusion is very difficult
> and quite arbitrary.
>
> The charter must not include such a rule.

The posted version of the charter suggested this as the basis for the  
WG's efforts, AND says that the WG must verify the direction in a  
consensus call.  I was involved in adding that language.

Thus, it is not cast in stone.

Do you oppose the formation of the WG, support it or ... ?  I'm  
assuming it's not black or white, but as we gauge consensus on  
forming the WG, it would help to know whether you object to the  
formation of the WG in general, or wish to see a WG on this topic but  
want to help set it on the right course.

thanks!
Lisa Dusseault
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20080304/b90e19f7/attachment.html