Browser IDN display policy: opinions sought

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at
Tue Dec 13 06:18:32 CET 2011

On 2011/12/13 7:28, Tina Dam wrote:

>> Or in other words: If the domain name can be displayed as a U-label, in a technically safe way, why not display it as an U-label?
> +1.
> I agree with others that the three other options are not to be
> desired. But since I don't see us reaching a 100% solution anytime
> soon, so if I had to select between A, B, and C, I would select A.
> The issues between the different options have been discussed at
> lenght, so let me just say that the biggest problem I have with B is
> that it leave it up to Firefox to decide what is a good/bad TLD
> registry. I think that belongs elsewhere, namely with ICANN.

If we had enough faith in ICANN, that might work. But judging from the 
mails on this list from people close to the ICANN process, I see lots of 
doubts and not much faith at all.

Also, as I have said earlier, asking "one only of A or B or C" is 
essentially the wrong question. A 100% solution will indeed be 
difficult, but each of A or B or C only are essentially something like 
20% solutions, throwing most of the baby (in terms of the problem, 
totally harmless IDNs) out with the bathwater.

Regards,   Martin.

More information about the Idna-update mailing list