Re: [I18nrp] Mappings for IDNA2008 ?

And some of this, of course, is the result of attempts to be backward 
compatible with IDNA2003, when the WG consensus was to have a transition 
that fixed the problems in 2003.  The decision of UTS46 is really to have 
that transition last essentially forever. This is, I suspect, a difference 
in taste between the ietf and UTC communities about how to make those 
trade-offs, but it has created part of the problem.

A
--
Andrew Sullivan
Please excuse my clumbsy thums.

On February 4, 2019 19:26:21 "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> In article <6660b7e2-1d5b-6a5d-3d1c-55a757e24843@ix.netcom.com> you write:
>>> Are there any published IDNA2008 mappings?  As far as I can tell,
>>> everyone uses one from UTS46 by default, and it's not very good.
>> Examples of its badness, please.
>
> As I understand it:
>
> If you speak Turkish, the case folding is wrong.
>
> If you speak Persian, the joiners are wrong.
>
> If you speak Arabic, the mapping or lack thereof between
> ASCII and Arabic digits is often wrong.
>
> If you speak Chinese, the whole thing is wrong because Chinese users
> expect their ASCII pinyin to be turned into Chinese.
>
> IDNA 2008 said very clearly that good mappings depend on the user's
> context, with the language being a large part of that context.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> i18nRP mailing list
> i18nRP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18nrp