M-label definition

Mark Davis mark at macchiato.com
Fri Apr 10 19:21:03 CEST 2009

I think it is a clear principle that any PVALID character cannot be mapped
to a different character. So if eszett stays PVALID, then it can't be
mapped. Conversely, if we decide that it should be mapped (as DENIC wants*)
then we will remove it from PVALID.

I think a second clear principle is that for characters in U3.2, either we
map precisely the same as IDNA2003, or we don't map at all.


* See http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2009-March/003743.html

f) But if there is room for negotiation and mappings could be (again) part
of the standard, then we would like eszett to be mapped to "ss" to ensure
backwards compatibility.

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 09:08, Cary Karp <ck at nic.museum> wrote:

> Quoting Mark:
> > In terms of exposition, however, I think the simplest choice of
> terminology
> > is that M-Label is anything that maps to a U-Label, including the
> identity
> > mapping.
> This means that "weiß" is not an M-label. Is that what we want?
> /Cary
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20090410/54eb6985/attachment.htm 

More information about the Idna-update mailing list