Consensus Call Tranche 6 (Character Conversions)

Michel SUIGNARD Michel at suignard.com
Mon Oct 20 19:50:21 CEST 2008


Polling window closes at end of the day, October 20th (US Eastern Time)


Place your reply here:  YES or NO (I am slightly confused by the question, see below)

COMMENTS:

Strictly speaking I am fine with the 3 questions asked (6.a, 6.b and 6.c). I share some of the issues mentioned by Mark, but could live with the current text. So, if this is strictly the question, this would be a YES.

If the consensus call also concerns 5.3 "Character Changes in Preprocessing or the User Interface", then I have a more serious issue that would require a fix imo (thus a NO position). At this point clause 5.3 contains a 'MUST NOT' declaration in its 3rd paragraph while saying in its 4th paragraph "This step is not standardized as part of IDNA, and is not further specified here". I see this as contradictory, because I don't see how you can impose a requirement on a step that you are explicitly not 'specifying'. In other words, the 'MUST NOT' statement must be removed and replaced by a statement saying that the pre-processing should not (lower case intended) map PROTOCOL-VALID characters. Again it is up to the pre-processing spec to mandate that, not the protocol spec.

(In general I am a bit overwhelmed by the pace here, I was also travelling the past few days)

Michel


There are several decisions that the working group will need to make to confirm consensus.  I will send a series of proposals over the next two weeks requesting YES or NO positions on each within a 4 day window. If NO is the response, a reason for that position needs to be stated. If there is a clear consensus based on responses or in the absence of a consensus against each proposal, it will be assumed that the proposal is acceptable to the Working Group.

Parenthesized symbols (e.g., "(R.1)") after the items are references to the issues lists where additional explanations can be found, as sent by John Klensin as body parts "idnabis-protocol-issues-rev3" and "idnabis-rationale-issues-03" on a message titled 'Issues lists and the "preprocessing" topic'  to the working group on 18 August (http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2008-August/002537.html)

CONSENSUS STATEMENT:

(6) Conversion, validation, and related issues.

(6.a) The discussion of Unicode conversions in Section 5.2 of
Protocol-05 is satisfactory.   (P.7)

(6.b) The discussion of A-label validation in Section 5.4 of
Protocol is satisfactory, even though it leaves considerable
flexibility to implementation decisions.  (P.8)

(6.c) Labels are not permitted to start with combining marks.
(P.13)

NOTE NEW BUSINESS ADDRESS AND PHONE
Vint Cerf
Google
1818 Library Street, Suite 400
Reston, VA 20190
202-370-5637
vint at google.com







More information about the Idna-update mailing list