Re: [idn] UTC feedback

[Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>]

> >I don't see any way to make the registration rules "global" without
> >imposing some language's assumptions on users of other languages
> >which do not share those assumptions.  and that IMHO is not acceptable.
> 
> None the less, this WG had previously agreed  earlier this year
> that we needed to have the same canonicalisation/normalisation rules
> apply all over in order to be interoperable.

I'm not talking about eliminating spelling differences via canonicalization 
or normalization.  I'm talking about dealing with spelling difference
by having multiple RRs registered in a zone, one for each spelling,
or some other technique to create the same effect without actually
creating a separate entry for each spelling in the zone file.

> By the way, precisely which language that you personally use
> is being adversely impacted by the matter of global rules
> or local rules for normalisation/canonicalisation ?
> 
> >some things need to be global and universal - request and response
> >formats, normalization, canonicalization, and the name tree itself.
> 
> How to handle accent marks is inherently part of
> normalisation/canonicalisation.  So you are agreeing with me.

no I'm not.  unless you're saying that accent marks need to be preserved
through normalization (I think you did say that much) and any variations
handled on the server end (I think you did not say that).

> >but some decisions - like who gets to register which names within
> >a zone and which names are in conflict with others - are inherently
> >part of the policy of the registry for that zone.
> 
> You're confused.  "which names are in conflict" is really a matter
> of how the canonicalisation/normalisation rules are defined.  Above
> you say that is globally defined.  Here you indicate it is not.
> Please be consistent with yourself.

you're the one who is confused.  you're not bothering to read what I write.

Keith