Re: [idn] Unicode tagging

[RJ Atkinson <rja@inet.org>]

At 17:27 15/08/00 , Edmon wrote:
> > > > machines need to know how to translate IDNs from whatever
> > > > encoding they use into unicode/10646 (for queries) and back
> > > > (for address lookups).
> > > >
> > >
> > > That is very reasonable... why then is it not a good idea to tag the
> > > encoding as we have suggested in a standard and easily recognizable way?
> >
> > if you always use unicode on the wire, there's no need for a tag.
> > systems that have to support multiple encodings (or even the
> > possibility of multiple encodings) are far more complex than
> > single-encoding systems.
> >
>
>I dont think this is totally true... there are different 
>transformations of Unicode as well as different specifications 16 bit 
>or 32 bit.  

I must be confused, but I thought we'd already settled on using
ISO-10646 and using the UTF-8 encoding on the wire, so those 
other specs and variations are irrelevant at this point, right ? 

Ran