[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Comparisons of the proposals
- To: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Re: [idn] Comparisons of the proposals
- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 19:41:12 -0800
- Delivery-date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 19:42:20 -0800
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
At 11:15 AM 3/21/00 +0800, James Seng wrote:
>The UTF-5 I-D is *NOT* a draft for IDN. (Paul take note. So comparing UTF-5
>I-D to CIDNUC I-D is moot :)))
Correct. For those of you following the comparisons, you can probably just
swap the UTF-5 transformations from James' draft into the two-step
transformations (compress then Base32) in CIDNUC. That is, you can look at
just the 10646-to-comatible-ASCII-conversion aspects of UTF-5 and CIDNUC,
with the rest being pretty interchangeable.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium