Re: INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <[e-mail]>]

John,

> I think the key question is what should be on that agenda.

There probably isn't any point in putting encodings, equivalence
classes, intermediate mappings or tables, and other puns for the
problem recently solved (incorrectly) in the IDN WG. 

So, those problems "in layer N" that don't resolve (pardon the pun)
uniquely down to the solution that unfortunate activity has proposed
"in layer 1" (or "0", I've lost count), aren't ab initio absurd.

There's lots of them, the label space semantics can be extended by
just a few (ASCII) characters, like blanks, and backspaces for that
matter, without meaningfully venturing outside a particular character
repitoire.

Just assume (as a hypothetical) that only some clueless few Asians
and "character mavens" will contribute (bother with) the IETF on i18n
issues. If the proposed activity isn't nuanced by ENOASIANS, fine.
If the proposed activity _assumes_ participation by Asians qua Asians,
on an i18n issue, an assumption check is now in order.

Eric