Changing DISALLOWED (was Re: Reserved general punctuation)
JFC Morfin
jefsey at jefsey.com
Fri May 2 12:31:06 CEST 2008
At 11:37 02/05/2008, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>Yes, we have talked about "an expert group" and such things, and
>long term yes I absolutely think we will have such a process.
>BUT, until then, the only reliable review process we have for
>changes is by issuing a new RFC.
An RFC will only create a new version. We are talking of the real
life DNS (supposedly IDNA layer is to encapsulate the DNS as far as
the majority of the DNS users is concerned). There is no reason for
IDNA updates to deploy faster than DNS updates, moreover than the
independent cpu population will probably dramatically grow. The key
issue is therefore to include in the IDNA concept an automatic update
logic, probably through RRs read by an IDNA associated logic?
I note that the resolution of the same need for langtags has been
disregarded, the answer being that the update strategy would be the
same as for Unicode. This was acceptable as long as langtags are
mostly used by some large Unicode aware systems. It is less
accepptable for something directly affecting the way billions of
people use the DNS.
I have a question which may be stupid, but I am not sure about the
answer. How will someone with an IDNA 2003 conformant browser
interact with an IDNA 2008 conformant IDN and vice-versa?
jfc
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list