Browser IDN display policy: opinions sought

[Mark Davis ☕]

I'm not familiar with the code, but I think that (A) may actually be:

A (IE, Chrome): Unicode if the (single) 'script' of the string matches one
of the scripts of the user's language(s) in the options,
Punycode otherwise.

It is pretty easy and reliable to detect the script of the string, whereas
language detection would be unreliable.

(It would be possible to match the characters of the string against the
"customary" characters used in the user's languages in the options, but
that would be trickier, and is probably not worth it.)

Mark
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
*
*
*
[https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033]
*



On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 09:49, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>wrote:

> This approach sucks in all the ways you say.  I think it is the worst
> option.
>
> I think that the right approach would be A _if_ you could get the
> advantages of B automatically somehow.  At the moment, however, I
> think all the answers are bad ones.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20111209/eca8fa9d/attachment.html>