Re: [idn] process
"JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com> Sat, 26 February 2005 01:23 UTC
Received: from psg.com (mailnull@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA22151 for <idn-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:23:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.44 (FreeBSD)) id 1D4qd1-000E6S-JL for idn-data@psg.com; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 01:20:19 +0000
Received: from [63.247.74.122] (helo=montage.altserver.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.44 (FreeBSD)) id 1D4qcz-000E5x-U1 for idn@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 01:20:18 +0000
Received: from lns-p19-1-idf-82-251-82-92.adsl.proxad.net ([82.251.82.92] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1D4qcy-0001w8-BS; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:20:17 -0800
Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050225185646.030e9900@mail.jefsey.com>
X-Sender: jefsey+jefsey.com@mail.jefsey.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 02:20:06 +0100
To: Erik van der Poel <erik@vanderpoel.org>, idn@ops.ietf.org
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: Re: [idn] process
In-Reply-To: <421EA0C9.1010500@vanderpoel.org>
References: <421B8484.3070802@vanderpoel.org> <20050223072837.GA21463~@nicemice.net> <D872CCF059514053ECF8A198@scan.jck.com> <421D8411.9030006@vanderpoel.org> <p06210208be4390618c81@[192.168.0.101]> <421E0D0C.2000309@vanderpoel.org> <p06210202be43c3888991@[192.168.0.101]> <E07CE813AD23B2D95DA0C740@scan.jck.com> <421E30F2.1040408@vanderpoel.org> <0E7F74C71945B923C52211F3@scan.jck.com> <421EA0C9.1010500@vanderpoel.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ops.ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on psg.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.1
Sender: owner-idn@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Erik, I will try to respond that with caution. Based upon real world situation. Trying not to hurt anyone. At 04:51 25/02/2005, Erik van der Poel wrote: >1. Is this the right time to start working on Internet Drafts leading up >to new version(s) of the IDNA RFC(s)? If not, when? The IDNA solution as well described by John Klensin, has IMHO low chances to commercially take off. I suppose it will progressively be replaced by different grassroots solutions in non-Latin countries at lease, as this has started. Due to this progressive evolution, we may suppose these solutions will still use punycode, so the experience acquired will remain of real interest. nameprep.org is OK. I may be wrong but the solution will most probably be based on simple principles: - respect of the DNS. Either with lingual TLD (extension of the root or PAD [private alias directory]) or with .lingual_sld.tld and conversion. - language homogeneity for the whole URL - reduced number of authorized characters as decided by the TLD/PAD Manager. This will probably supported by local ISPs and by plug in (lingual names are probably to be of different usage, much more like DNs were used in the sole USA in 1984). The "plug in functions" will probably be extended and made part of the OS once stabilized. This will result from a grassroots effort, documented further on as RFCs for information. So there is no need for a WG no one wants to reopen, for ICANN which has no impact (2 mails on the ICANN IDNA mailing list in one year), etc. but for relations with TLDs, Govs, Users Reps, Cultural organizations. >2. Am I stepping on someone's toes by creating nameprep.org? Feel free to >respond publicly or privately. Certainly not. You may accumulate an experience which will be precious to everyone. But understand no one is really happy with the IDNA. The imposed terms by "Powers Above" were unworkable. There has been a lot of efforts.Everyone tried his best. There is still the IRI to fully understand. There is e-mail to support. There are the babel names. There are the PADs to come. >3. If this is the right time to start work on drafts, who would like to >write some prose? Frankly I think this time it should be carried the other way around. To understand the real world. Then to put a solution together. To test it. Then once it starts working to document for information. But in the meanwhile we should do everything to keep a good image to IDNs. I do think that a multicolored URI support Draft could help in providing a way out from the current concern, and restoring credibility give a credibility to a new team. >4. Do we need to revive the IDN WG? Certainly not! Then what else? There are different point of views. Mine is that the real need is to consider the whole matter of the multilingual internet. Once the framework has been clearly understood, ML.ML DNs will be far easier to understand and discuss. But the IETF/IAB is obviously not interested (yet?). As RFC 3869 shows it. I had started writing a Draft on Multilingual Internet. My idea was to document how the existing Internet standard process can document the Multilingual Internet. The idea was to use RFC 3066 and the work of Paul Hoffman as a basis, adding a mutilingual considerations part in every RFC (like the security consideration, cf. RFC 3066), to extend the concepts in extending and structuring Paul Hoffman"s definitions lists, and to build an MLTF as there is a TFIPv6. To gather the concerned people and organizations. Its purpose would be to share into the standard process comment period, to help a culture to develop. The first thing was to document questions for an IAB guidance over the architectural aspects called by a MI. The recent saga of the RFC 3066 bis shown there is still work ahead before this can be considered. Your initiative could help to prepare the ground. >5. Any other process questions? Why not to work on practical functions and on real tools testing? You have seemingly good developer skills, we could help? jfc
- [idn] related work Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Unicode categories Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] something a little lighter for the week… Doug Ewell
- Re: [idn] stability Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: process Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] punctuation John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Re: stability JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Gervase Markham
- Re: [idn] stringprep: PRI #29 Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Gervase Markham
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] process Paul Hoffman
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables YAO Jiankang
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] punctuation John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] punctuation tedd
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] punctuation Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Gervase Markham
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Adam M. Costello
- [idn] Re: character tables John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Paul Hoffman
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Martin v. Löwis
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability John C Klensin
- [idn] Re: Unicode categories John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- [idn] character tables Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Mark Davis
- Re: [idn] Re: stringprep: PRI #29 Erik van der Poel
- [idn] stability Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: dichotomies JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] process Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables William Tan
- Re: [idn] Re: process James Seng
- [idn] Re: stability Simon Josefsson
- Re: [idn] stability Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stability Martin v. Löwis
- Re: [idn] Re: process Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: [idn] Re: stringprep: PRI #29 Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] punctuation tedd
- [idn] Re: dichotomies Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Martin v. Löwis
- Re: [idn] punctuation Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] process JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- [idn] Re: stability Simon Josefsson
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- [idn] Re: stringprep: PRI #29 Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] process John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Re: Unicode categories Mark Davis
- Re: [idn] process Doug Ewell
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] process Erik van der Poel
- [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] punctuation tedd
- [idn] punctuation Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability James Seng
- [idn] Re: stability Simon Josefsson
- [idn] something a little lighter for the weekend Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] something a little lighter for the week… Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] process Gervase Markham
- [idn] Re: character tables Cary Karp
- [idn] Mozilla? JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] punctuation Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: Unicode categories Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stability Simon Josefsson
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- [idn] Re: process Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [idn] process Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] punctuation Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Gervase Markham
- Re: [idn] Re: process Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: process James Seng
- [idn] stringprep mailing list Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: dichotomies Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] Re: process Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stringprep: PRI #29 Simon Josefsson
- Re: [idn] punctuation Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] stability Martin v. Löwis
- [idn] stringprep: PRI #29 Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: character tables Paul Hoffman
- Re: [idn] nameprep2 and the slash homograph issue Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stability Simon Josefsson
- [idn] process Erik van der Poel
- [idn] stringprep: existing profiles and string pr… Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Erik van der Poel
- [idn] dichotomies Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] stability JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- [idn] Re: character tables Cary Karp
- Re: [idn] Re: process Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stringprep mailing list Simon Josefsson
- Re: [idn] Re: Unicode categories Martin v. Löwis
- Re: [idn] Re: stability JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] something a little lighter for the week… John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] something a little lighter for the week… Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] Re: dichotomies JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Erik van der Poel
- Re: [idn] Re: stability Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stringprep: PRI #29 Simon Josefsson
- Re: [idn] stability Erik van der Poel
- [idn] Re: stringprep: PRI #29 Simon Josefsson