IDNABIS Working Group completes its work

Lisa Dusseault lisa.dusseault at
Tue Mar 16 21:29:23 CET 2010

To answer the question about my concerns, I was particularly worried about
client implementations of mappings: the WG consensus call indicated that
those who had plans to implement mappings, planned to implement TR46 rather
than the WG product.

The WG had a lot of discussions a year ago about whether to leave mappings
as a free-for-all and what I heard at that time was that a lot of people saw
the value in consistent mappings across implementations -- so a user going
from one browser to another, or from email to a browser, won't be surprised
at where they end up.  Unfortunately, we didn't arrive at a conclusion that
provided that consistency, with one set of mappings proposed by the Unicode
Consortium and another set proposed by this WG.  I still hope for Unicode
and IETF participants both to work on understanding why there are
conflicting requirements and gain a realistic view of what is likely to be
implemented (and over what transition period).  So, work can continue thanks
to individual contributions and reviews, or even through the possibility of
a future WG.


On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Vint Cerf <vint at> wrote:

> The document will go forward from the two editors as a non-WG submission.
> Although the last poll regarding the "mappings" document seemed to show
> that most respondents wanted to proceed with submission to the IESG, the AD
> felt that there were mapping issues not addressed to her satisfaction. We
> were unable to agree on a version of mapping that would satisfy all concerns
> among the AD and editors. Reference to TR46 seemed to be desired by the AD
> but as you see from Patrik Faltsrom's detailed review of that draft
> document, there is much to discuss and debate. In the end, the only way
> forward seemed to be to declare the WG "mappings" document to be "dead" and
> to allow a version of it to be submitted for publication as an independent
> submission.
> vint
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya at
> > wrote:
>> Dear Vint and all,
>> I'd like to know in detail why the editors, the chair and the AD couldn't
>> satisfied with current mappings document.  If the reason was not cleared,
>> mappings document couldn't be go forward.
>> Even if mappings document is informational, the publication of the
>> document
>> as RFC is very important to keep backward compatibility and
>> interoperability
>> between current systems.
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya at>
>> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:32 -0400 Vint Cerf <vint at> wrote:
>> > Ladies and Gentlemen of the IDNABIS Working Group, as you see from this
>> > notice, the last working group document that was not yet forwarded by
>> the AD
>> > has been declared "dead" after it proved impossible to find a version
>> that
>> > could be forwarded to the IESG that satisfied the preferences of the
>> > editors, the chair of IDNABIS and the Area Director. It is expected that
>> the
>> > editors of the "mapping" document will offer a version of it as an
>> > informational, non-WG contribution.
>> >
>> > All other documents from the working group have been forwarded to the
>> RFC
>> > editor for final processing.
>> >
>> > I believe this concludes the business of the IDNABIS Working Group and,
>> as
>> > chair, I declare that the Working Group has completed its work and can
>> now
>> > be retired from the active list.
>> >
>> > I thank the editors, the Area Director, and especially the participants
>> in
>> > the IDNABIS working group for their time and thoughtful contributions to
>> the
>> > work over the past two years.
>> >
>> > Vint Cerf
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at>
>> > Date: Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM
>> > Subject: ID Tracker State Update Notice: draft-ietf-idnabis-mappings
>> > To: idnabis-chairs at,
>> > draft-ietf-idnabis-mappings at
>> >
>> >
>> > 'State Changes to Dead from AD is watching by Lisa Dusseault'
>> > ID Tracker URL:
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idna-update mailing list
>> Idna-update at
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Idna-update mailing list