[Idna-arabicscript] mapping of Full Stops

Vint Cerf vint at google.com
Mon Oct 12 19:28:31 CEST 2009

if inside the label then its use as a substitute for U+002E seems  
highly problematic.

On Oct 12, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Erik van der Poel wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:49 AM, "Martin J. Dürst"
> <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:
>> On 2009/10/12 1:03, Erik van der Poel wrote:
>>> U+3002 has a much longer
>>> history in IDNA and is much more firmly established. If U+06D4 would
>>> be mapped to U+002E at the data interchange level (think HTML),  
>>> there
>>> would be a period where IDNA2003 implementations and new
>>> implementations would resolve domain names differently.
>> Was U+06D4 allowed inside a label in IDNA 2003? If yes, then this  
>> will
>> indeed be a problem. If not, then the difference is only between  
>> being
>> resolved (with appropriate mapping in IDNA 2008) and not resolved  
>> (in IDNA
>> 2003), which is an unfortunate but tolerable difference in  
>> implementation
>> behavior.
> U+06D4 is allowed inside a label in IDNA2003. Sorry, I should have
> been more explicit about that.
> Erik

More information about the Idna-update mailing list