Re: [idn] IDN refocus, v4

["James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

> I used the terms STD13 Domain Name, STD13 Host Identifier,
> Internationalized Domain Name and Internationalized Host Identifier, 
> which may be suitable.

the reasons i point this out is because i *think* we should redefined
i18n dn vs hn. i18n domain names should be as what i18n hostnames is
right now..and then i18n host names have another set of rules.

ie.
applications will check validity of i18n domain names.
policy will check validity of i18n host names.

i am thinking out loud...so i am not sure myself either.

> > TES is an encoding. CES is an encoding. I am asking if we need more
> > than one encoding (either TES or CES). That is my first question.
>
> As stated, I believe that we need 7- and 8-bit TES because the
transfer
> media offer 7- and 8-bit paths, and it would impose inefficiencies on
> those services to choose only one or the other.

Can we at least agree with the sequences of questions first?

1. Do we need more than one CCS.
   Conclusion: No, we only need one and ISO/IEC 10646.

2. Do we need more than one encoding (TES or CES) of ISO/IEC 10646?

3. If answer to (2) is yes, then how many encodings cases do we need?
3.1 For each cases, what is the right appropriate encoding?
3.2 Insert your [2] & [3]

4. If answer to (2) is no, then what is the right appropriate encoding?

The problem for me is I am still at Q2 and you are already at Q3.2.

So can we go back and ask that Q2 first?

-James Seng