Eszett (Sharp-S) again (was: Re: AW: Oustanding issues trac
jefsey at jefsey.com
Wed May 28 16:34:03 CEST 2008
At 16:03 28/05/2008, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>(This is not the same thing as an informational saying, "Here are some
>ways, and the advantages and disadvantages of each." I can imagine
>such a document, although whether it would be on-charter for this WG I
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64The charter of the wg is to produce
>the protocol rules essentially and to outline what may have to be
>the responsibility of registries or registrars for any further restrictions.
Then, in refering to my answer to John on the document organisation,
I would suggest that:
- this could be introduced in the first "for information" document
[in order to be clearly documented as out of scope].
- not alluded to in the standard track protocol document.
- your cons and pros could either be in the first document, or in the
third "practical" document (I suggested it to be a BCP, for easy updates).
More information about the Idna-update