RE: [idn] RE: An idn protocol for consideration in making the requirements

[Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>]

At 09:39 AM 2/8/00 +0900, Martin J. Duerst wrote:
>I think that all else equal, it is clearly better not to define
>something new.

Correct. All other things are far from equal in this case.

>  And there are good arguments besides aesthetics for it.

Specifics, please.

>So this requirement should stay in, but as a Should, not a Must.

It's not in the current draft; it is a proposed addition. There have been 
people who have spoken in favor and against it.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium