Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-faltstrom-5892bis-04.txt> (The Unicode code points and IDNA - Unicode 6.0) to Proposed Standard

[Patrik Fältström <[e-mail]>]

FWIW, although I agree with John and expect me getting a fair number of editorial corrections because of English not being my native language when this document hit the RFC editor, I have slightly changed the first paragraph in the upcoming new version to the following:

(sorry, can not generate TXT now, but you get the point...)

If you have other suggested changes, let me know.

<t><xref target="RFC5892">RFC 5892</xref> specifies an algorithm that
   was defined when <xref target="Unicode5.2">version 5.0 (later
   updated to version 5.2)</xref> was the current version of Unicode,
   and it also defines a derived property value based on that algorithm.
   Unicode 6.0 has changed GeneralCategory of three code points that
   where allocated in Unicode 5.2 or earlier. This imply the derived
   property value differs depending on whether the property definitions
   used are from Unicode 5.2 or 6.0.
</t>

   Patrik

On 24 maj 2011, at 04.22, John C Klensin wrote:

> Peter,
> 
> Personally, I think it would be a big mistake to spend a lot
> more time on this.  It just isn't worth it.  And I continue to
> object to the IESG -- or even responsible ADs -- doing
> copy-editing.  We pay the highly qualified RFC Editor staff for
> doing that and should let them do their jobs.  That said, if
> this is worth fussing with...
> 
> --On Monday, May 23, 2011 16:26 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> The first paragraph of the Introduction contains a few
>> infelicities and grammatical errors. I suggest modifying it as
>> follows:
>> 
>>   RFC 5892 [RFC5892] specifies an algorithm that was defined
>> when    the current version of The Unicode Standard was
>> Unicode 5.2    [Unicode5.2], and also defines a derived
>> property value based on    that algorithm.  Unicode 6.0 has
>> changed the GeneralCategory of    three code points that were
>> allocated in Unicode 5.2 or earlier.    This implies that the
>> derived property value differs depending on    whether the
>> property definitions used are from Unicode 5.2 or    Unicode
>> 6.0.
> 
> Strictly speaking, IDNA2008 (including RFC 5890 and 5892) were
> defined when the current version of the Unicode Standard was
> 5.0.  It was then verified (and would have been modified if
> needed, but it wasn't) for Unicode 5.2.  The table-generating
> algorithm was rerun for 5.2, producing new non-normative
> reference tables.  Because of the General Category changes that
> were part of Unicode 6.0, the IDNA category values for those
> code points changed and rerunning the table-generating algorithm
> produces different results.
> 
>     john
> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>