[iucg] [Gen-art] LC review: draft-ietf-idnabis-bidi-06.txt

Patrick Suger psuger at gmail.com
Tue Oct 6 15:54:54 CEST 2009

For the reasons given below and because I think this is a point the Arabic
mailing list should address first.

2009/10/6 jean-michel bernier de portzamparc <jmabdp at gmail.com>

> 2009/10/6 Marie-France Berny <mfberny at gmail.com>
>>  At 11:14 06/10/2009, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>>>> I object to the removal of CS, because specs other than IDNA might make
>>>> use of BIDI. Please see my previous mail.
>> +1
>> Removing them adds nothing to IDNA but may create an additional problem
>> with idnaplus when we succeeded in miniminzing them quite to nil. What would
>> be the interest?
> I object to a removal at this stage. The current IDNA document set has been
> reviewed by many people we asked if it could support the international
> semantic addressing scheme we work on. The response was positive and we
> therefore joined the WG consensus. Removing CS at this stage is something we
> cannot accept as it would call for new review round. This would call at
> least for one month, work, time, explanations, and probably some credibility
> loss with experts of whose we need further cooperation.
> Unless obviously if there is a clear dirimant reason? But this does not
> seem to be the case?
> Portzamparc
> _______________________________________________
> iucg mailing list
> iucg at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iucg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20091006/38eb7f36/attachment.htm 

More information about the Idna-update mailing list