Re: [urn] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-hakala-urn-nbn-rfc3188bis-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 6/7/18 6:52 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Thursday, June 7, 2018 16:29 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> Text along those lines seems appropriate. We might also
>> discourage people from defining their own canonical
>> transformation, but rather re-use one that's already defined
>> (say, a PRECIS profile such as UsernameCaseMapped).
> 
> I started to write a much longer note and explanation, but maybe
> a summary is better for all concerned (i.e., if more is needed,
> it is readily available).

Indeed. Similarly, I had started writing a longer note yesterday,
pointing out that much of this is already covered in:

1. RFC 3986 (esp. Section 1.2.1, which doesn't say how "to use a wider
range of characters" nor does it "specify the character encoding used to
map those characters to octets prior to being percent-encoded for the URI")

2. RFC 8141 (esp. Section 2.2, which specifies a character encoding of
UTF-8 but doesn't say how to process "those characters" before UTF-8
encoding).

My reading of Adam's and Ben's messages is that they'd like a more
detailed specification of the last-mentioned item, or at least bring the
matter to the attention of anyone brave or foolhardy enough to use
"those characters" in NBNs.

+1 to the rest of what John said.

Peter