Consensus Call Tranche 8 Summary - Addendum

[Mark Davis]

This was discussed at some length a while ago. I really don't think it
belongs in the IDNA specifications, since the information is hard to
maintain, and is really informative -- not required for the protocol.
One could give a pointer to Table 4 of
http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr31/#Specific_Character_Adjustments and/or
to http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr39/#General_Security_Profile (we plan to
update that section to be appropriate for IDNA2008).

Mark


On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Martin Duerst <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>wrote:

> At 23:10 08/10/21, Marcos Sanz/Denic wrote:
> >> One idea I just had was to create a category HISTORIC.
> >> While this category would be equivalent to PROTOCOL-VALID
> >> for the protocol, it would clearly give some information
> >> to registries out there. Because it would not mean any
> >> decision with regards to protocol, it might be easier
> >> for us to come forward with some guidelines on what
> >> to put into HISTORIC, easier than it was with MAYBE
> >> and friends.
> >
> >Although such categorization might be useful, I don't find that the
> >definition of such a category *within the IDNA standard* appropriate.
> >Isn't there within the Unicode Standard already a definition of "obsolete
> >character" in the sense of "historical character" (not to be confused with
> >a deprecated character)? Obsolete characters in the sense of "historical"
> >are at least mentioned in Unicode 5.0, Chapter 3.4, D13.
>
> D13 talks about deprecated characters. These are characters that are
> obsolete in the history of the Unicode standard (e.g. formatting-like
> stuff that once seemed like a good idea to encode, but where it was
> later found out that it was just creating nothing but problems), which
> is totally different from characters used to write historic (in the history
> of human culture) texts. What you are looking for would be in Section 3.5,
> but I haven't found it. It may be possible to put something together
> rather easily based on script blocks, but I guess that would be rather
> rough, because many script blocks contain both characters in modern
> use and historic characters.
>
> Regards,    Martin.
>
> >If such a concept actually already exists, the message to the registries
> >out there could plainly be: "These characters are PVALID within IDNA, but
> >before they are included in your positive list for registration, check out
> >the Unicode Standard to find out if they are historical within your
> >context. If they are, caveats apply."
> >
> >Best regards,
> >Marcos
>
>
> #-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
> #-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20081022/a420a9cf/attachment.htm