[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt
"Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com> wrote:
> The profiles do not have to be subsets of nameprep. Case variance and
> character variance are both likely to occur.
If one application is using Nameprep and another application is using
some other profile with different normalization or a different mapping
table, then there are going to be pairs of names that match according to
one application and don't match according to the other. What good can
come of that?
"Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com> wrote:
> If we embraced the robustness principle, they would look at the spec
> and say "MUST NOT do conversion" and they would break nothing.
>
> > Having the specification mandate UI behavior seems out of place to
> > me.
>
> That is exactly what it does now: SHOULD transliterate anything that
> looks like an ACE domain name.
"SHOULD" is less of a mandate than "MUST NOT", and we leave a big escape
hatch: "except when the use of the non-ASCII form would cause problems
or when the ACE form is explicitly requested".
And by the way, the recommendation does not apply to "anything that
looks like an ACE domain name". It applies to "ACE labels obtained
from domain name slots". Domain name slots are parts of structured
data/interfaces. If something comes from a domain name slot, then it is
a domain name, with certainty. If a domain label passes all the checks
performed by ToUnicode, then it is an ACE label by definition. There is
no guessing.
AMC