[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Unicode tagging
- To: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Re: [idn] Unicode tagging
- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:01:13 -0700
- Delivery-date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:21:52 -0700
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
At 11:30 AM -0400 8/16/00, Edmon wrote:
>uniform byte-length characters are extremely beneficial to DNS and we should
>try to preserve it in the protocol.
Could you elaborate on why this is true? In the applications that
mandate using UTF-8, no one has been unable to implement it.
>We dont know whether some day we might go beyond UCS-4.
This is just plain silly. In fact, it is likely that we will only
need a tiny fraction of the space allowed by UCS-4, and there are
moves by ISO to make that clear.
>But we also have to understand that domain names are no longer simple text
>commands over the internet... it is part of a company's brand and
>identity... We have the responsibility to let people have the names they
>really want...
Nope, stop right there. We have a responsibility to keep the Internet
running well. Once we have fulfilled that responsibility, we have
another one to stretch out in ways that meet desires and still keeps
the Internet running as well (or better) than it did before. If
someone wants to use a name that will hurt the running of the
Internet, we have a responsibility to tell them "no". If someone
wants us to stretch into regions we have not had time to analyze for
things like security implications, we have the responsibility to tell
them "no".
Further, I believe we stretch for the benefit of the large number of
end users, not of the smaller number of companies who want to profit
from the Internet. Fortunately, both usually benefit at the same
time, but when there is an imbalance, we should favor the users.
Seen another way, if we go too quickly on this in order to help a
small number of companies who don't mind confusing users, we could
easily hurt the many billions of people who have not yet started
using the Internet. Our responsibility is to the larger long-term
audience, not the smaller immediate one. Balancing that weight
against the obvious desire for change (in this case, away from
ASCII-only names) is not easy, but it is our job.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium