[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Where to do form-folding?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: [idn] Where to do form-folding?
- From: "A. Vine" <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 09:55:28 -0700
- Delivery-date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 09:57:01 -0700
- Envelope-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
To add to Dan's comments:
Much normalization is expected to take place at the point of generation from the
charset perspective. In other words, the client is expected to normalize the
text as it is created. This is the case for much of the text processing world.
Logistically it has been found that if it has not been done at the point of
entry, then the data will be inspected for normalization many, many times in its
lifetime, reducing efficiency.
So, since standards are stating, or at least highly recommending, normalization
at the point of creation, it's not a huge step to add canonicalization for
IDNs. Of course, the specification would have to be precise.
It's true it is a bigger burden on the client. But as Dan pointed out, it has
some distinct advantages. And it has a precedent.
Andrea Vine, email@example.com, iPlanet i18n architect
"In these Regulations any reference to a regulation is a
reference to a regulation of these Regulations"
-- Education (UK Student Loans) Regulations 1997
Dan Oscarsson wrote:
> Even if it is summer, some of you are hopefully still active. At
> least some of you going to the IETF meeting.
> Here is one thing we could discuss and that could be discussed
> at the meeting.
> The question is: Where should form-folding be done?
> There are many applications that compare hosts or domain names.
> For example: sendmail and many browsers.
> These applications should also compare IDNs as equal in the same way
> that DNS does. This means that they also need to implement form-folding.
> If the resolver libraries include the standard implementation
> of form-folding (and name comparing), and had the API public, all
> applications could use it instead of implementing their own.
> So by choosing 2) we can get the additional benefit of supplying
> a standard place for applications to the routines to do
> form-folding and IDN comparing. And thus reducing the risk of many
> implementations, some that will do it wrongly.
> Thats it. What do you think? Am I missing some important aspects to
> make the best choice? Maybe it is something that could be
> discussed at the meeting.