UTC Response to "Letter to Unicode Technical Committee on IDNA2008"

Gihan Dias gihan at uom.lk
Wed Dec 9 17:53:18 CET 2009


On 08-12-2009 17:42, Vint Cerf wrote:
> I believe that the discussions of the past week have confirmed a general consensus
> on the preference that Final Sigma and Sharp-S be PVALID. We did not poll for
> the joiner/non-joiner question because a consensus already existed, in my opinion,
> as chair, for these to be contextually valid (CONTEXTJ).
>
> The method of introduction of IDNA2008 is important to all of us, to promote its
> utility. At the close of the day, I will review all of the comments received and attempt
> to synthesize what I believe is a plan around which consensus can be obtained.
>    
All,

Good. Now let's get on with implementing it. I'm sure it will be 
painful, and we'll regret certain decisions down the road, but that's 
how it is.

Gihan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3908 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20091209/40e53b59/attachment.bin 


More information about the Idna-update mailing list