punyspace summary

Gervase Markham gerv at mozilla.org
Thu May 15 16:12:24 CEST 2008

jefsey wrote:
> In (1) the split is against the punycode process. It should therefore be 
> a positive point if there was a very strict document that would be 
> completed by an IETF (or Unicode, or ICANN) guaranteed program everyone 
> could use for legal checking of the nature of an "xn--". The resulting 
> funycodes are public domain and anyone can build private extensions 
> through Sunycodes (specialised punycode like process).

What would be the advantage in doing such experiments or building such 
extensions within the xn-- prefix, as opposed to using another prefix?


More information about the Idna-update mailing list