IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [I18ndir] I18ndir last call review of draft-faltstrom-unicode11-08

Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se> Fri, 05 March 2021 06:08 UTC

Return-Path: <patrik@frobbit.se>
X-Original-To: i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B88C3A1E15; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 22:08:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=frobbit.se
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VCBMpLG8JnT6; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 22:08:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A19C83A1F0B; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 22:08:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.165.72.129] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffc:0:94dd:562e:e3e:498d]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F1C421F4E; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 07:08:06 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=frobbit.se; s=mail; t=1614924486; bh=DGJN95wxKiOdqBHL3SW1PKRXyiVRTEgnn3Jyqfq2hM0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=pNnuyRTJKhZWsdmIxT+HZQ+vMKR/3Qi4B8PQeWlyYb9jFPf2oHyftFiP1/WXg5WaT 7i7TUHCMVEwyGv2ATpVw39XPO1ZI19XVht3fOfRbAM31cEjAT0dNWdYlRqSuA1BSbE MXJ6WMLSBVs4HOXcAzhIwgbh7MGVIqgmYqzYTtj8=
From: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: "Asmus, Inc." <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>, i18ndir@ietf.org, draft-faltstrom-unicode11.all@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2021 07:08:05 +0100
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5757)
Message-ID: <7E644794-8EA0-4D4A-A41C-99233D81220A@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <B12BA8663F969AA3466015E5@PSB>
References: <161491663292.10706.8764718902953358427@ietfa.amsl.com> <B12BA8663F969AA3466015E5@PSB>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_58511FDA-2D40-46AB-A4D4-EA3BBFDCA60B_="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18ndir/ZY6VVCRT8t5_j8uhxrTq0HIsV10>
Subject: Re: [I18ndir] I18ndir last call review of draft-faltstrom-unicode11-08
X-BeenThere: i18ndir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Directorate <i18ndir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i18ndir>, <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i18ndir/>
List-Post: <mailto:i18ndir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18ndir>, <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2021 06:08:23 -0000

On 5 Mar 2021, at 6:04, John C Klensin wrote:

> (Last call list removed - as far as I know, there is no current IETF Last Call, especially on draft-draft-faltstrom-unicode11.)
>
> Without comment on any of the details right now (after the time that went into draft-crocker-inreply-react and a few other
> things, I'm going to need at least until the weekend), I just want to verify that you are looking at the current version of the current draft, which is draft-faltstrom-unicode12-01.  As far as I know, that version has not yet been made generally
> available but perhaps Patrik could make it available to the
> directorate list.

Attached!

   Patrik

>    thanks,
>     john
>
>
> --On Thursday, March 4, 2021 19:57 -0800 "Asmus, Inc. via
> Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>> Reviewer: Asmus, Inc.
>> Review result: Ready with Nits
>>
>> (1) The math of code points needs to be reviewed in section
>> 4.3. It appears to not account for a property change for
>> U+111C9
>>
>> (2) In Section 5, there's a sentence that seems to have a
>> sense destroying edit:
>>
>>      The code point if being accepted might due ???? to
>> implementations of      IDNA2008 based on older versions of
>> Unicode than 11.0.0 be rejected.
>>
>> (3) plural noun/verb mismatch in section 6
>>
>>     ... new versions [...] is...
>>
>> (4) Section 8: use of definite article. Drop "the" in front of
>> Unicode Version (also check other instances)
>>
>> (5) Usefully, the discussion of SHARADA SANDHI MARK could
>> point out whether it treated the same or different from other
>> SANDHI marks in related scripts. (From just looking at the
>> tables, and not the original UCD entries, it looks like that
>> they are all now treated the same, which would be beneficial
>> under the "least astonishment" principle - or whatever it's
>> called).
>>
>> This review based primarily on the diff, with just some look
>> at the full text to get the complete context for some items.
>
>
> -- 
> I18ndir mailing list
> I18ndir@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18ndir

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email