Allowed characters (was: Re: Casefolding Sigma (was: Re: IDNAbis Preprocessing Draft)

Vint Cerf vint at
Mon Mar 31 10:00:31 CEST 2008


I think paul was doing his best not to disturb the main list with  
what looks like a personal exchange. I would ask you to respect that  
practice or, if you feel the need to inform the entire list, to  
choose less inflammatory rhetoric in list-wide communications.

On substance, Paul is correct that the design team has been doing its  
best to decouple the IDN logic from any particular version of Unicode  
by using only the properties assigned by UTC of the characters in  
Unicode to determine their suitability for use in IDNs. As we have  
already seen there are some exceptions but the IDN200X effort is  
trying to minimize the need for them.



On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:21 PM, Michael Everson wrote:

> At 13:06 -0700 2008-03-30, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> Off-list, but keeping Patrik on the Cc:
> No. No, and no. I am not going to respect this off-list. I *am not*  
> a member of the UTC. I am Irish National Body representative to ISO/ 
> IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2, and I *work* with my colleagues in the UTC.  
> Sometimes we work together. Sometimes we work with opposing  
> viewpoints. But we work openly. I am a guest here on idna- 
> update at and I do my best to contribute positively.  
> Your answering me privately (and in the way you did so) I consider  
> an affront to my Unicode colleagues, and I believe they have the  
> right to know what you have said. So, in good faith and to honour  
> our collective endeavour, I am bouncing this back to the list.
>> At 11:27 PM +0400 3/30/08, Michael Everson wrote:
>>>> I haven't followed the beta process for 5.1 very carefully,
>>> You ought to. It is in YOUR interests and in the interests of  
>>> YOUR constituents to do so.
>> Why?
> Evidently because you are responsible to your constituents?
>> We know that IDNA200x will come out after 5.1, and maybe even 5.2  
>> or 6.0 or whatever.
> And 6.3 and 7.2 and 9.0. And you should give a damn. If you can't  
> see why, you should wonder why you are in this business. The  
> Universal Character Set will, should we all not drown in global  
> deluge or fail to the next pandemic, record the entire history of  
> our species. Pay attention. This activity is worthwhile, and worth  
> doing properly.
>> One of the major goals of IDNA200x is to be version-independent.  
>> We don't want to know how you make your sausages, or even how fast  
>> you make them.
>>>  And I say this as Irish NB representative to WG2, who am often  
>>> at loggerheads with the UTC.
>> I noticed. :-)
> And even when I am, I respect them, and I accord them respect.
>>> So my opinion is not a Unicode opinion. (Though I suspect they  
>>> hold the same view. You OUGHT to follow these processes carefully.)
>> If we are successful, I think we shouldn't have to.
> May I suggest that you take your head out of the sand? You are part  
> of a community. That community is wider, and MUCH MUCH MORE  
> IMPORTANT than IETF and its bizarre and dysfunctional procedures  
> and its I-don't-have-to-care-about-the-world-outside-my-parents'- 
> basement self-importance.
>> My "why?" above is a serious question. What can TUC do that would  
>> cause us to need to track their versions?
> People are people. People err. Your belief that you can do this  
> work without care to its content is an example of such fallibility.
> Off the high horse. Out of the white castle. People who work in WG2  
> and people who work in the UTC are your colleagues, and you owe  
> them more respect than you have shown today.
> -- 
> Michael Everson *
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at

More information about the Idna-update mailing list