Unicode 5.2 -> 6.0
vint at google.com
Fri Oct 15 17:26:02 CEST 2010
I think you have captured succinctly a workable position.
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Pete Resnick <presnick at qualcomm.com> wrote:
> On 10/14/10 4:01 PM, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
>> The stability of domain names is far more important -- that once a domain
>> name is valid, that it remain so.
> So I wish to disagree with the above statement and therefore *disagree* with
> the suggestion that we adopt (c) adding U+19DA to G. I am in favor of (a).
> We made a design decision in IDNA2008 that domain names that contained other
> than some small set of letters, digits, and a small set of punctuation were
> more trouble than they were worth. We made it clear to folks that acceptable
> domain names should only contain certain classes of characters. What I take
> Unicode 6.0 to be saying is, "There was an error in 5.2: A character that we
> all agree is *not* a decimal digit was incorrectly labeled as one." If some
> wise guy somewhere tried to create a domain label with what is demonstrably
> *not* a decimal digit because there was an error in the standard, that wise
> guy gets what he deserves. It will not decrease the stability of the
> Internet to invalidate domain names that happened to contain this character.
> The day that LATIN SMALL LETTER I changes class, I'll be happy to put
> something in category G. This is not that day.
> Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
> Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
More information about the Idna-update