[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Prohibiting characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep
- To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
- Subject: Re: [idn] Prohibiting characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep
- From: "Edmon" <edmon@neteka.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:11:11 -0400
- Delivery-date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:09:04 -0700
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
> [[ This message got lost in the traffic on optional characters, but
> is as important of a change to the document. Comments are welcome. ]]
>
> >Greetings. After the discussion in Pittsburgh on the nameprep draft,
> >Marc and I have an open issue on when to prohibit characters.
> >
> >The current document has the order of processing looking like:
> >1) Check for prohibited input (many)
> >2) Fold case
> >3) Canonicalize with normalization form KC
> >
> >A possible alternative has been proposed that adds a step:
> >1) Check for prohibited input (a few, just for case)
> >2) Fold case
> >3) Canonicalize with normalization form KC
> >4) Check for prohibited output
> >
> >I believe that the proposed alternative is a good one, even though
> >it complicates the processing some by having two lists. The
> >advantage is that it would disallow fewer characters on input, and
> >therefore cause less surprise for users.
> >
I am sorry to have missed the discussion about canonicalization form...
However...
I am sure Einstein will never ever agree that E=mc˛ is the same as E=mc2 !!!
Form KC doesnt seem to make sense in the context of a "name" of which the
DNS is about...
I believe form C should be the choice...
Edmon
> >
> >--Paul Hoffman, Director
> >--Internet Mail Consortium
>