IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Patrik Fältström " <paf@frobbit.se> Fri, 07 December 2018 04:43 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
X-Original-To: i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7689712E043 for <i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 20:43:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.722
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 6_LpmmqLZ51s for <i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 20:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92E4F12008A for <i18nrp@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 20:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.165.72.241] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffc:0:431:eda0:2df6:6662]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 39F16274E4; Fri, 7 Dec 2018 05:43:23 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=frobbit.se; s=mail; t=1544157803; bh=qL9xFmWiIYp1tPyb27BRFaNM0ezSbKtMEy5i60iH79M=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MJuTwK0VbHHsa3cC1aYmv9A6ATlQ+GD4X5jsboH3o0BZ+DXgFFlR1XADX2ZhHi3JQ NoMtqx7OC/jMGYfZPcYsIXQjpXJNQ+mektc81cd+ldiE0yXv8pv+jxdKrZSeZVxK7d IVniGtrTWrnG3R5CgfM9E6K5JPbrdHsCsZCpWPrQ=
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: Patrik Fältström <paf=40frobbit.se@dmarc.ietf.org>, Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>, i18nrp@ietf.org, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 05:43:22 +0100
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.2r5568)
Message-ID: <07CB0B3B-E48A-40CD-BBC9-E6CAA2FB29F0@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <055301d48dc8$0ea95120$2bfbf360$@acm.org>
References: <154385119878.18333.5085298134102919486.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <FF6F9EB9-C73B-4EC0-AC4F-3E3BFBABA0AB@vpnc.org> <8E20D432-01B0-4B52-80BB-3348C5FE73AF@vpnc.org> <CC73FC25-92FC-4822-B267-15C41CE450F2@frobbit.se> <D81CDFF3-8CDF-4168-9CEA-E8DC3A133B73@vpnc.org> <217ede0e-ea1f-bb31-a276-f8c618c71278@ix.netcom.com> <8885EE4C-412E-4337-A099-66354A36CEA1@vpnc.org> <EC12FDAE-4ABD-4AD3-A35A-B39D2C8A0AE0@frobbit.se> <f4417f80-fa86-11e6-baf7-2365981e18b1@ix.netcom.com> <48A2A546-4FEA-4060-8706-34D210B2ABAF@frobbit.se> <055301d48dc8$0ea95120$2bfbf360$@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_E1971AC4-0131-4E90-87B4-0025E57E4A7B_="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18nrp/s2_f20BJHXVLzmIAMpVc46A61aM>
Subject: Re: [I18nrp] Last Call: <draft-faltstrom-unicode11-05.txt> (IDNA2008 and Unicode 11.0.0) to Informational RFC
X-BeenThere: i18nrp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Review Procedures <i18nrp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i18nrp>, <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i18nrp/>
List-Post: <mailto:i18nrp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18nrp>, <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 04:43:29 -0000

On 7 Dec 2018, at 1:59, Larry Masinter wrote:

> Registries should be conservative in the sense of advising their clients about the likely usability of the registered name among their target audience.
> I don't think the IDNA RFCs currently are conservative enough.

Agree. Specifically, as so many are misunderstanding what the RFCs are saying, and even if also others (like SSAC) request conservatism when coming up with a subset of PVALID (etc) repertoire, I felt it can never be said too many times this is a requirement.

> As I've noted before, usability includes "re-enterable" (including "retypable") .

I might not agree with this, as for example very few characters in arabic script are "retypable" for me. So this is at least a separate issue. But what the registry chooses, I feel is up to them, as long as they do come up with a good repertoire.

   Patrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email