Re: [idn] case folding

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

Patrik Fältström wrote:
> I would like to see an I-D specifying how the UTR#15 and UTR#21 is to
> be used. See for example draft-duerst-i18n-norm-03.txt for a
> specification on how to use UTR#15.
> 
> Do people think this draft is ok? If so, I am happy to see that it is
> last called (as AD in charge for these things).

I have not study the I-D in detail. But IMHO, it is actually a good draft to
compliment RFC2277 so I believe the usage of this I-D can go beyond IDN.
 
> I.e. don't be afraid of eventual bureaucracy. I am the one which
> should resolve it, but I don't mind having someone writing a draft
> like the one Martin has written for UTR#15 for UTR#21.
>
> The IDN papers then should refer to those I-Ds (and later RFCs of course).

One comment which I receive offline. It is not the bureaucracy which is
worrying. It is the fact that if we were to design a protocol based on
incomplete Unicode Technical Reference, we may be dependent on Unicode to
complete the TR before an solution can be implemented.

What this implies is that it is possible that 

1. We wait for Unicode to finish their work, which may take indefinately
   time; or

2. Someone will go ahead implementing without the handling TR; or worst,

3. Someone will go ahead implementing with their own interpration.

2 & 3 is definately a path down incompatibility.

-James Seng