RE: [idn] draft-ietf-idn-requirements-04.txt (revised copy)

[Karlsson Kent - keka <keka@im.se>]

============================================================
OLD:

1.1 Definitions and Conventions

A language is a way that humans interact. In computerised form, a text

----------------------------------------------------------
NEW:

1.1 Definitions and Conventions

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

Examples quoted in this document should be considered as a method to
further explain the meanings and principles adopted by the document.
It is not a requirement for the protocol to satisfy the examples.

In computerised form, a text

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was just text that inadvertently got lost.  I've also deleted
the sentence that Mark did not like.
=====================================================================

OLD:
[11] Internationalized characters MUST be allowed to be represented and
used in DNS names and records. The protocol MUST specify what charset is
used when resolving domain names and how characters are encoded in DNS
records.
-----------------------------------------------------------
NEW:
[11] Characters for letters, digits, ideographs, and syllables,
including combining characters, used in orthographies around the
world MUST be allowed to be represented and used in DNS names and
records. The protocol MUST specify what charset is used when
resolving domain names and how characters are encoded in DNS records.

============================================================

OLD:
[14] The protocol SHOULD NOT invent a new CCS for the purpose of IDN
only and SHOULD use existing CES. The charset(s) chosen SHOULD also be
non-ambiguous.
------------------------------------------------------------

NEW:
[14] The protocol SHALL NOT invent any new CM, and SHOULD NOT invent
any new TES for the purpose of IDN. Each CM and TES that can be used
for IDN MUST be unambigous. Which CM (and TES, if any) is in use for
any given IDN MUST be unambiguous.

==============================================================
OLD:
[30] If the charset can be normalized, then it SHOULD be normalized
before it is used in IDN. Normalization SHOULD follow [UTR15].
(conflict)

------------------------------------------------------------
NEW:
[30] If the charset can be normalized, then it SHOULD be normalized
before it is used in IDN. Normalization SHOULD follow [UAX15].

==============================================================
OLD:
The DNS has to match a host name in a request with a host name held
in one or more zones. It also needs to sort names into order. It is
expected that some sort of canonicalization algorithm will be used as
the first step of this process. 
------------------------------------------------------------
POSSIBLE NEW:
The DNS has to match a host name in a request with a host name held
in one or more zones. It also needs to sort names into a deterministic
order (it need not be in any culturally correct order, sorting by
coded representation is suffient). It is expected that some sort of
canonicalization algorithm will be used as the first step of these
processes. 

---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure about this change.

For the purpose of sorting (domain) names, for human consumption,
UTS 10 (Unicode Technical Standard 10) should be used.

But I guess a sorting that is not for human consumption is intended,
and then I guess any specific deterministic sorting can be applied
(like "binary" (code point) ordering after 'canonicalisation').  That
is, however, not clear from the requirements text.

================================================================
POSSIBLY ADD:

[UTS10]     "Unicode Collation Algorithm", Unicode Technical Standard #10,
            http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr10/, 2000-08-31,
            M. Davis and K. Whistler, Unicode Consortium.

[ISO14651]  ISO/IEC 14651, "International string ordering and
		comparison -- Method for comparing character strings
		and description of the common template tailorable ordering".

-----------------------------------------------------------------

These could be useful references; even if not needed internally
for IDNs (in a locale-independent way), I'm sure some UIs will
want to order also IDNs in a culturally correct, and locale-dependent,
way.

Like the Unicode standard and 10646, UTS 10 and 14651 are "twin"
standards (though in neither case identical in all respects).
-----------------------------------------------------------------

All of the references should be edited for consistency.

================================================================

		/Kent Karlsson