Re: [idn] Adding "optional" characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep

[James Seng <James@Seng.cc>]

I dont agree on this view.

Keith already said this during the meeting. Wires and bits don't care
about I18N. If we only focus ONLY on the wire format, then the DNS
packet are 8-bit clean already. So lets shutdown the list, go home and
pat yourself on your head.

The reason I18N of Domain Names is because of Human Interaction. And
that is more important than the wire format. 

It is also why the WG is called IDN not IDNS because it is beyond DNS.
This also raise the point (again) that we need not limit ourselves to
only DNS.

-James Seng

"Brian W. Spolarich" wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> 
> | What we need to do is to put the pieces together, and still remember
> | that we do one thing, and Unicode people another.
> |
> | As soon as we have (unknown) overlap, I start to get nervous.
> 
>   I strongly agree.  My sense is that this particular problem is an
> important one to the IETF, and as such it will be important to build
> strong consensus around the particulars of our proposed solution.  As many
> people have contributed to this discussion, its clear that the linguistic
> issues are extremely complex, and there is likely no 'right' answer in
> some of the cases.  No matter what choice we make, someone will come
> forward and say "you did such and such incorrectly".
> 
>   I would suggest that the core expertise area of the IETF is 'bits on the
> wire' protocol work, and while we may have considerable interest and
> expertise on the some of linguistic issues here (i.e. James' work in the
> Han ideograph area), I would feel uncomfortable suggesting that we have
> enough breadth and depth on the subject as a whole to make a
> recommendation in some of these areas that would have enough authority.
> 
>   My instinct would be to essentially 'punt' to the Unicode Consortium
> folks.  If there are areas that concern us which are not currently covered
> by a UTR and probably should be, lets define the problem area and enlist
> their help.
> 
>   -bws
> 
>   (Apologies for missing the point on the Hebrew optional character
> issue.  I'm more of a 'bits on the wire' guy [see above] :-)