Interoperability Requirements - was RE: Stop me if I've misunderstood...

[Gervase Markham]

On 10/07/09 00:05, Shawn Steele wrote:
> What we (Microsoft/Internet Explorer) mean by interoperable is
> loosely this:
>
> 1) IE shouldn't need to know the details of IDN.  If it does, then so
> does IIS and Outlook and Word and, and, and...  Additionally if
> something changes, then IE breaks.  What IE needs is effectively to
> call GetAddrInfoW() and get an address for a Unicode name.  Since
> names may be in unmapped Unicode, or Punycode, IE may also need
> something like GetHostDisplayName() or something.  Again, getting a
> name into a canonical form should be System API magic that client
> apps like IE shouldn't have to worry about.

I would add: And what that Windows system API does should be clearly 
defined in a standard, such that applications which choose not to call 
it, or applications on other platforms, can all behave identically.

 > ...
 >
> 7) We'd prefer no IDNA2003 breaking changes because SOME user is
> going to hit them and complain to us.

Speaking only for myself, I agree, but I can see the cases for the four 
characters previously discussed - as long as the resolution is in 
consultation with the relevant script-using communities.

> I would expect that our competitors, some of whom also participate in
> this forum, would agree with most, if not all, of these requirements.

I believe I agree with them all, although see below.

> (Though I would hope that most professionals would take more time on
> the list than I have ;-)  I am a bit confused though about one
> particular competitor that seems to be taking conflicting positions
> :)  Certainly if Firefox or Chrome or Safari or Opera or Apache or
> OpenOffice or whatever has conflicting requirements, it'd be nice to
> know before it shows up as an interoperability bug :)

If that's a reference to me, then I'm afraid I'm too stupid to figure 
out exactly what you mean. :-) Which of the above principles have I 
disagreed with?

Gerv