Re: [I18nrp] Last Call: <draft-faltstrom-unicode11-05.txt> (IDNA2008 and Unicode 11.0.0) to Informational RFC

["Paul Hoffman" <[e-mail]>]

Before I go to the [e-mail] mailing list with my concerns about 
this draft, I hope it is OK to bounce them off people here in case I'm 
wildly off track.

=====

In Section 1:
    Specifically, the Internet Architecture Board did issue a statement
    [IAB] which requested IETF to resolve the issues related to the code
    point ARABIC LETTER BEH WITH HAMZA ABOVE (U+08A1), introduced in
    Unicode 7.0.0 [Unicode-7.0.0].  This document resolves this issue 
and
    suggests IDNA2008 standard is to follow the Unicode Standard and not
    update RFC 5892 [RFC5892] or any other IDNA2008 RFCs.

In Section 4.1:
    The discussion in the IETF concluded that although it is possible to
    create "the same" character in multiple ways, the issue with U+08A1
    is not unique.  In the case of U+08A1, it can be represented with 
the
    sequence ARABIC LETTER BEH (U+0628) and ARABIC HAMZA ABOVE (U+0654).
    Just like LATIN SMALL LETTER A WITH DIAERESIS (U+00E4) can be
    represented via the sequence LATIN SMALL LETTER A (U+0061), and
    COMBINING DIAERESIS (U+0308).  One difference between these 
sequences
    is how they are treated in the normalization forms specified by the
    Unicode Consortium.

This sounds like the IETF is saying that if the Unicode Consortium 
changes how a character appears in a normalization form other than for 
case folding (Section 2.2 of RFC 5892), that change does not affect the 
tables for IDNA2008. Is that correct?

=====

In Section 4.1:
    As U+08A1 is discussed in draft-freytag-troublesome-characters
    [I-D.freytag-troublesome-characters] and elsewhere.  Regardless of
    whether those discussions ends in recommending including the code
    point in the repertoire of characters permissable for registration 
or
    not, it is acceptable to allow the code point to have a derived
    property value of PVALID.

This sounds like it is saying that even though 
draft-freytag-troublesome-characters is meant for standards track, 
because it is not yet finished, this document (which is informational) 
can ignore the other document and make changes to the IANA registry. If 
that's correct, it concerns me because it could make the IANA registry 
unstable for characters that we know about and are actively discussing. 
If I'm not correct, I'd like to hear why so that maybe this document can 
be reworded.

--Paul Hoffman