Unassigned code points

Patrik Fältström patrik at frobbit.se
Sun May 29 19:44:58 CEST 2011

On 29 maj 2011, at 19.37, Simon Josefsson wrote:

> Looks fine except that I believe U+20B9 should be DISALLOWED rather than
> UNASSIGNED.  For consistency with RFC 5892 you may want to include
> 10FFFF too (other noncharacters are included in the list).

Yeah, 10FFFF is a bug in my software that I have never fixed...

I will have a look at U+20B9.

What rule is it failing on?


More information about the Idna-update mailing list