Re: [I18nrp] draft-faltstrom-unicode11-04.txt

[Asmus Freytag <[e-mail]>]

On 10/6/2018 10:53 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> My proposal is [1], together with a more forceful push to strict IDNA2008 adoption. No IDNA2003, no UTS#46, no homebrew mixes. Including that registries really do a careful conservative selection of code points to be used in whatever context it is to be used.
>
>
> The problem though is that this is*my*  view. Sure, a few others have randomly and "by pure luck" told me "this is ok".

I'm happy to tell you so and not randomly at all, and by replying to you 
here, it's not a reply received "by chance" either, but in what arguably 
is the proper channel for this feedback. (Option 1 in your numbering).

> But is this a stable informed decision by IETF?

I think it should be.

>
> This very fast turn into a process issue where IAB have asked for progress, and IETF is to deliver.


Agreed; and insofar as Unicode delivers a new version every year now, 
there's not a very big window for this draft; right now, it's up-to-date 
including Unicode 11.0.0 and that's fine as it goes (as its conclusion 
is that further process should revert to normal tracking of new Unicode 
versions - presumably unless some specific issue is found). However, 
publishing something that's a version behind the then latest Unicode 
version will be less satisfactory.

>
> And this is where I take a step back, and want IESG and IAB to make up their mind. This group was created for I18N issues, we have a charter, but then what? Is this where drafts like these should be discussed?

I would say, yes. Because the nobody benefits from spreading IETFs 
already limited i18n resources any thinner.

It means that the group will perforce have a dual charter, both 
providing i18n input to all specifications as well as discussing and 
finding consensus on core i18n issues central to IETF. IDNA is one of 
those core issues.

A./