Re: [idn] Internationalized PTR draft submitted

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

James,

Why must we always talk about the origin "language?" If the domain names 
have been RACE encoded then they were eventually converted to UTF-16 which
basicly covers all "languages."

My meager understanding of RACE and Unicode 3.0 concludes we SHOULD ban
the word "language" from our discussion/drafts and replace it with
charset.

Since we could have *any* string of UTF-16 encoded chars what point is it
to maintain the origional language? Infact if we had the following
hostname, which should be legal (U-0F3C U-0726 U-35A6) which "language"
would go in the "language" tag? The above are one Tibetan, one CJK and one
unknown....

Please educate me on the utility of maintaining the description "language"
or charset for that matter, once you're in UTF-* you should be able to go
to any other charset!

-rick

On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, James Seng wrote:

>   example of an IPTR RR:
> 
>    1.2.3.4.IN-ADDR.ARPA.    IPTR  "language" "name-in-utf8"
> 
>   [RFC1766] describes the ISO 639/ISO 3166 conventions.  A language name
>   is always written in lower case, while country codes are written in
>   upper case.  The "language" field in an IPTR RR MUST follow the con-
>   ventions defined in [RFC1766].
> 
>   For Example:
> 
>    4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA.            IPTR     "zh-cn"   "name-in-utf8"
>    4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA.            IPTR     "zh-tw"   "name-in-utf8"
>    4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA.            IPTR     "ja-jp"   "name-in-utf8"
>    4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA.            IPTR     "ko-kr"   "name-in-utf8"
>