Re: [Lucid] Problem statement and scope

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

Dear colleagues,

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:13:33AM -0500, Marc Blanchet wrote:
> Hello,
>  First item to agree is the problem statement and scope.  Do we have a concensus on this? Let me start some (on purpose wide) questions:
> - is the problem only limited to a few codepoints where the pre-composed and composed forms are not normalized appropriately?
> - are we tackling homoglyphs?
> - else?

In response to these questions (admittedly, somewhat longer after the
fact than we'd have liked), Asmus and I have put together a draft
outlining what we understand to be the issues.  It's at
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-lucid-prob-stmt/.

We'd like very much to have some discussion on the list prior to
Dallas.  If we go into the meeting in Dallas without the necessary
preparation, the BoF will not tell us what to do next.

I also really strongly encourage people to read
draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70 (which is currently at -03 but, I
understand, may become an -04 in the very near future).  There's a lot
of very helpful background in it.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]