support of metadata

[jean-michel bernier de portzamparc]

+1

2009/9/16 Elisabeth Blanconil <eblanconil at gmail.com>

> Jean-Michel,
>
> I must say I do prefer FE73 rather than PRIVATE USE codes. This is
> because PRIVATE USE codes are within the ASCII limits (what may create
> confusion with poorly designed implementations) and may poorly print
> if it was actually printed. FE73 would react more clearly. IMHO the
> best would be to have an ISO 10646 SDO area reserved at the IUCG
> reference center taken on the UNASSIGNED area. I am sure that
> French.European majuscules (as quoted by Martin Dürst) are not the
> only metadata that we would need to carry throught codepoints.
>
> Elisabeth Blanconil
>
> 2009/9/14 jean-michel bernier de portzamparc <jmabdp at gmail.com>:
> > Anyway, my problem is _not_ to know what IDNA will be able to do or not.
> My
> > interest is to make sure that IDNAPLUS is able to match users'
> expectations,
> > and also to be 100% IDNA conformant. Obviously, IDNAPLUS will do things
> IDNA
> > will not do. What I try to make sure is that the difference is only :
> >
> > 1. to support IDNA2003 upper-cases in U-Label
> > 2. keeping PRIVATE USE ONE and PRIVATE USE TWO PVALID as PVALID, i.e.
> > respecting Unicode's respect for users.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20090916/8a5b5b41/attachment.htm