Re: [idn] WG Update

[liana.ydisg@juno.com]

If IDN is going to be universal to all devices, then a 
handheld device may have uppercase support for 
a sick user to have a familar reading quickly.  So 
I think your case preserving arguement should be
considered. 

Liana

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001 08:33:56 +0200 (MEST) Dan Oscarsson
<Dan.Oscarsson@trab.se> writes:
> 
> >> I recommend modify the last line "MUST be discussed" to be
> >> "MUST be provided", as to be " Case-insensitivity for non 
> US-ASCII MUST be
> >> provided in the protocol proposal"
> >
> >I disagree. As it happens, all of the proposals provide 
> case-insensitivity
> >for non-US-ASCII, but it is *not* a requirement. The protocol would 
> work
> >fine and would be perfectly acceptable to users without it. We 
> should be
> >clear about the difference between features that are *desirable* 
> (in this
> >case for consistency), and *required* features.
> 
> Well, I disagree to that.
> 
> It *is* a requirement that case-insensitivity shall work for all 
> letters.
> That has been the DNS standard so far. That is what people expect.
> To have case-sensitive matching is not fine for everybody.
> 
> If we are not going to support case-insensivity and case preserving 
> in
> responses, then we should turn it of for ASCII too.
> Either we support full backward compatibility (that includes having
> case-insensitivity and case preserving in protocol for all letters),
> or we kill it off for ASCII letters too.
> Just because non-ASCII has not been used, does not mean that people
> expect the same rules that exist for ASCII to exist for non-ASCII.
> The current DNS standard has defined that case-insensitivity shall 
> be
> used and that case should be preserved in responses. We break that
> if it is not done for non-ASCII letters too.
> 
>    Dan
> 
>