Charter, changes in prefixes, and documentation

Paul Hoffman phoffman at
Wed Mar 26 04:13:50 CET 2008

At 10:20 PM -0400 3/25/08, John C Klensin wrote:
>--On Tuesday, 25 March, 2008 18:24 -0700 Mark Davis
><mark.davis at> wrote:
>>  That works for me. Item (iii) needs fleshing out a bit.
>>                 (iii) A change to the basic approach taken in
>>  the design                team documents.
>>  It is clear when a change would violate (i) or (ii) would be,
>>  but not clear what kind of change would violate (iii).
>I more or less copied that, with some slight re-wording, from
>the last version that was posted.   I would welcome narrower
>language, but am also not sure it is necessary.

Given that a few people expressed confusion on that wording, it seems 
necessary. How about:

(iii) A change to the approach in the design team documents (a 
protocol that is independent of Unicode versions, that removes any 
character mapping in the protocol, and has improvements to the bidi 

That does not cover all the changes between IDNA2003 and the design 
team design, (see 
but it covers the high points that could cause a charter refresh.

More information about the Idna-update mailing list