Re: [I18n-discuss] Draft UTR 53 and associated issues

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Thursday, October 5, 2017 13:55 -0700 Asmus Freytag
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> There's an important clarification of scope that's missing
> from the document, but can be found in the mail-thread on
> idna-update.
> 
> Implication for IETF may be less than it appears without that
> clarified scope.
> 
> A./
> 
> PS: John, can you forward this as necessary - I'm not on all
> the lists you sent this to.

That is the reason I tried to force the discussion onto the
idna-update list and just tell people on the other two about it.
Will pull the other two lists in as needed.  So far, silence on
PRECIS, which is actually more likely to have problems than IDNA.

I may just not understand UTC procedures well enough but if the
need for rewriting and clarification is as clear as Mark's note
seemed to indicate, I don't understand why the draft has not
been withdrawn and rewritten.  An announcement to all three
lists about a new version would seem to me to be appropriate;
otherwise, this is my last posting to this one.

    john


best,
   john