Re: [idn] case folding

["Eugene M. Kim" <ab@astralblue.com>]

On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, James Seng wrote:

| However, should we reopen the discussion on what codepoint is allowed and what
| is not? I remember we have quite a heated argument and the consensus then was
| to leave it in the proposal protocol. Any changes now?

Yes and no.  As people start to write the actual proposals, it seems a
good timing to reopen those issues (so that proposal writers can benefit
from the discussion) now, but none of the codepoints should be mandated
in the requirements document (except for obvious ones such as alphabet
characters and digits).

Maybe some other codepoints make almost no sense to use in domain names
as well; they include C0/C1 control codes and private use area
(U+E000-U+F8FF) at least.  And there are a lot of `controversial'
letters such as arrow symbols and other pictographic characters.

However, IMHO even though we are ever to define some codepoints to be
excluded in requirements, they should not include any characters that
can have some influence on a particular language or script, except when
there is a strong discouraging reason to drop them.

Eugene Kim

-- 
Eugene M. Kim <ab@astralblue.com>

"Is your music unpopular?  Make it popular; make music
which people like, or make people who like your music."