Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Fri, 21 July 2017 03:08 UTC
Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18BF131D38 for <precis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=HtVnRCyS; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=fhZwY1h1
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 8fcVHotTITwY for <precis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16497131D37 for <precis@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:08:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD2B2094E; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:08:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:08:15 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=woL52qTaeiXP+shwOe zv0P4If/3ZoJtv95qFFPabc1I=; b=HtVnRCySIp5Ujuxi0DgLflZJZ5IceKpBOw xwg05APZiqWkdVpNN2jn7dbO5J0dN33DetOtjcoXAC7PHK5gja56fQjnM7I/GxIV sq3owuoOkEgTdZbdApLcfkHxejQnVveGzhTeiUoPRF/RRDJRHHTgDttwSUnBzVjy 8NgkFmYbns+ELQ1CmU1IWQMzw0x1jqh1wh30B5uCRj4pIKvoUbewvOHucBaQ1rct dYjdaGRR7Jq3wYU91aUor6YnMUiXsAMC2vWv2aJptvtz2MvDjM/z5+hT7CEZK2SI 4FYMbki5jbLfmf5YyOHYNkJ3QHp5+o/qUEHOXMAWVzDH3oEC92zA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=woL52qTaeiXP+shwOezv0P4If/3ZoJtv95qFFPabc1I=; b=fhZwY1h1 VCYx8DX38bWPmYIqI6uDW2WHCMEPlRI6eugNP346x2DojZ/6qgNcLKn20+BnYuM7 KL1n88L+Sjyffuap/a9leib79EDoCNB7sG2LiPhrNjFBMdgryFbZO9bkWB37i88C Tgc8bRh5fBPj+xt6emzXw2z8xUvFesNkPABOsNT2CGX/NwZ2kwvPGleyPz5V8Gp4 kt0gvcK77sw+EvkZXY/fc/aethEzkSuMPRLBLhhRhcHhfSw4zQJzH5BPBM+6Pv88 Ye+qBcbQW5eu66ehz/Ky723JEPGIfdfXzszZU3/WEid6pAI+KpoafXC9G2Ei35q0 CNymlfJMu3IT6A==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:H3BxWRA7AOiNOTnAKQ3dRA1wO3iKErsL697yPrOtFjFIdF0VW5-26w>
X-Sasl-enc: GuCqoRi2Vs3rQbmg2CkB1SSDcsTXX+VQdt9QIOk13ZYl 1500606495
Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 61E217E4EE; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:08:14 -0400 (EDT)
To: William Fisher <william.w.fisher@gmail.com>
References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> <CAHVjMKGcaC80UppnLV07A-GKKo16x5eMQ4BsKF5A2LEcdUm-CQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: precis@ietf.org
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Message-ID: <8165b2ce-de2b-2298-c1da-fd0c25f6fd75@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:08:13 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHVjMKGcaC80UppnLV07A-GKKo16x5eMQ4BsKF5A2LEcdUm-CQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/precis/hg_oQ2nwA9QjJYizjiqBwpXtTDE>
Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt
X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings <precis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/precis>, <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/precis/>
List-Post: <mailto:precis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis>, <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 03:08:17 -0000
On 7/19/17 11:30 PM, William Fisher wrote: >> What do implementers think is a "reasonable number of iterations"? My >> sense is that we're talking about at most 4 or 5, and usually 2 or 3. > > I interpreted the word "iteration" to mean "reapplication" of the > rules; not counting the first application. The Nickname test cases > become stable after 2 iterations of the rules. > > output1 = precis_encode(input) > output2 = precis_encode(output1) # iteration 1 > output3 = precis_encode(output2) # iteration 2 confirms that > output3 == output2 > > I can't come up with a Nickname test case that requires more than 2 > iterations to become stable, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. As far as I can determine based on reviewing various code points, that's right. This _should_ be a function of the code points involved (i.e., how many steps a code point is from something more stable), not the profile. > It's possible that a new PRECIS profile could be defined that has > stability issues. IMO, if a PRECIS profile isn't stable after 3 > iterations, it's broken. Agreed. > The last sentence might read like this: > > Therefore, an implementation SHOULD reapply the rules > repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string > does not stabilize after three iterations, the > implementation SHOULD reject > the input string as invalid. > > In the worst case, this means that you are calling precis_encode() > four times for an input string. That seems reasonable. Peter > > -Bill > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote: >> On 7/16/17 5:20 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >>> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >>> This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. >>> >>> Title : PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols >>> Authors : Peter Saint-Andre >>> Marc Blanchet >>> Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt >> >> Our area director pointed out to me offlist that the definition of >> "reasonable" is vague in the following text: >> >> Because of the order of operations specified here, applying the rules >> for any given PRECIS profile is not necessarily an idempotent >> procedure (e.g., under certain circumstances, such as when Unicode >> normalization form KC is used, performing Unicode normalization after >> case mapping can still yield uppercase characters for certain code >> points). Therefore, an implementation SHOULD apply the rules >> repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string >> does not stabilize within a reasonable number of iterations, the >> implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject >> the input string as invalid.
- [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09… internet-drafts
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… William Fisher
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… William Fisher
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Sam Whited
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Marc Blanchet
- Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bi… Peter Saint-Andre