Question about the agenda

[Paul Hoffman]

At 7:21 PM -0400 3/20/09, Vint Cerf wrote:
>I am not sure I agree at least in the following sense. I think we need 
>to ask ourselves, based on the goals of the WG and the current 
>IDNA2008 documents, what our assessment is of its implementation, side-
>effects, etc. That is different from coming to conclusions among 
>alternatives.

Yes, of course.

>Perhaps we are simply reflecting a different
>interpretation of "conclusions"?

Not really. The abstract of the JET draft says "[IDNA2008] will cause incompatibilities for Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) scripts and languages." Section 3 of that draft gives a good list of incompatibilities, none of which were listed in your document. It does not seem fair to ask the WG "complete discussions, if necessary on IDNA2008 implications" while purposely ignoring some of the implications that have been brought to the WG's attention, particularly those from major registries with a lot of IDNA experience who spent the time to write them down in an Internet Draft.