Re: [idn] Update Charter revision 2<4.2.0.58.J.20011025122342.067d7100@localhost><030701c15c37$e463d8b0$1401000a@jamessonyvaio><20011024124949X.yone@po.ntts.co.jp><4.2.0.58.J.20011025122342.067d7100@localhost>

[Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>]

At 15:10 01/10/25 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:

>In fact, there is every reason TO have it in this working group:
>
>1.  the work has been done here.
>2.  no other working group is laying claim to it.
>3.  we need the work.
>4.  we need it NOW.
>
>People have confused the need to separate a specification into two parts 
>with the idea of having the two parts done by different groups.

Very much agreed up to here.


>The problem with the previous combining into one document was not that the 
>technical content was a bad idea or particularly badly written.  It was 
>that having them combined proved to be very confusing to people

This is the first time I have heard this argument.
It wasn't confusing to me, but maybe that's because I have
been involved in various discussions about it.


>and that separating the parts makes clearer what part is general and what 
>part is specific to the DNS.

To separate the general and the specific parts, in order to be able
to reuse the general parts, is a very valuable goal.

I'm personally not sure we already understand what part is really
general, and what part is specific. Of course, because for IDN we
need all of it, it doesn't really matter to this group.
But I'm a bit afraid that other groups might try to use the general
part of it (stringprep) without checking whether the level of
generality provided really works for them.


Regards,   Martin.