Re: [idn] case folding

[James Seng <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

I support this idea. 

Since we are replacing [12] with just say "Unicode only", then we should refer
the case folding rules to Unicode Technical Reference. In this case, UTR#21.
UTR#21 *also* handled tr/A-Z/a-z/ so you can view this as an extension of
strcasecmp().

Any other script/language not handled in UTR#21 could be handled by the
proposed protocol in whatever ways it seem fit. (DNAME good, Duplicated Bad,
DNAME good, Duplicated Bad...:-)))))

-James Seng

RJ Atkinson wrote:
> 
> At 04:08 11/06/00 , GIM Gyeongseog-KIM Kyongsok wrote:
> >On Mon, 29 May 2000, Brian W. Spolarich wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 29 May 2000, Maurizio Codogno wrote:
> > >
> > > | What about saying that the only case folding is [A-Z][a-z], for
> > > | backward compatibility with present DNS?
> >
> >   considering that case folding seems quite complicated,
> >i like the above idea.
> 
> The above idea breaks other Romanised languages, such
> as Vietnamese, so I think its really not possible to adopt.
> 
> My alternative proposal is that we simply adopt the
> normalisation rules for alphabetic letters that are
> already specified by UNICODE Consortium.
> 
> Note well that I am *not* saying anything about CJK,
> Thai, Arabic, or other non-Romanised languages
> in this specific proposal about alphabetic letters.
> 
> >    as pointed out by somebody else (who?),
> >cases do matter on Unix systems.
> 
> >...and case DOES matter in URLs,
> which is perhaps more to the point here.
> 
> Ran
> rja@inet.org