IDNA2003 complication (was: Re: Changing the xn-- prefix)

Martin Duerst duerst at
Thu Mar 27 03:38:10 CET 2008

At 02:12 08/03/27, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

>If IDNA200x still requires all the current IDNA2003 complication, then
>registries and client developers will quite correctly wonder what the
>big benefit is supposed to be to them.  So they'll resist implementing
>the new standard.

Hello Andrew,

Can you give some details on what you mean by IDNA2003 complication?
I very much hope that we can fix IDNA2003 where it needs fixing, but
I don't see, based on the current proposals, that overall, for an
application programmer or for a registrant, things would get simpler
with IDNAbis.

Regards,    Martin.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#       mailto:duerst at     

More information about the Idna-update mailing list