Re: [idn] WG last call summary

[Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>]

At 11:01 AM 3/16/2002 -0600, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>Obviously. It's a question of getting there, however.


Not necessarily.

UTF-8 is an encoding.  IDNA uses an encoding.  Neither is a "native" 
representation of the semantics.

Given the tiny length of the strings involved, the relative differences 
between UTF-8 and the approach taken in IDNA is essentially irrelevant.

Note that we are approaching the 10th anniversary of MIME, which involves 
much larger strings, and there is still no strong pressure for system-wide 
use of "pure" binary encoding.  It exists and is used, but it is not the 
dominant encoding method, nor are users particularly aware of when it is 
being used.

d/

ps.  after this many years, it has become amusing to watch anyone make a 
firm prediction about the world's technical future.

----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dave@tribalwise.com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850