Re: FW: UTS #46, Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing, Version 6.1 Released

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FW: UTS #46, Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing, Version 6.1 Released

John C Klensin
Ted and Larry,

If the question is really about UTS #46, I'd encourage everyone
relevant to read RFC 5704, substituting IDNA and various Unicode
actions for MPLS and ITU-T as needed.   The point is roughly the
same: the Unicode Consortium decided that a (somewhat
incompatible) "improvement" to IDNA was needed, could not get
consensus for that specification in the IETF, and so went off
and wrote their own.

    john


--On Wednesday, February 01, 2012 16:54 -0800 Ted Hardie
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Larry Masinter
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Should the IRI spec explicitly follow Unicode updates?
>
> I'm not sure I understand the question.  Are you saying we
> should update this reference in the draft:
>
>   [UNIV6]    The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard,
> Version               6.0.0 (Mountain View, CA, The Unicode
> Consortium, 2011,               ISBN 978-1-936213-01-6)",
> October 2010.
>
> to the current 6.1? Or are you suggesting that the draft say
> that reference should be to something that is functionally
> "this thing or its successors"?
>
> Ted
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>> [hidden email]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 4:14 PM
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: UTS #46, Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing,
>> Version 6.1 Released
>>
>>
>>
>> Mountain View, CA, USA – February 1, 2010 – The new
>> version of Unicode Technical Standard #46, Unicode IDNA
>> Compatibility Processing has been released, updating to
>> Unicode Version 6.1. It adds support for 528 additional
>> characters in internationalized domain names (IDN).
>>
>> The specification provides two main features for use with the
>> internationalized domain names specification released in
>> August 2010 (IDNA2008):
>>
>> A comprehensive mapping to reflect user expectations for
>> casing and other variants of domain names. This mapping is
>> allowed by IDNA2008, and follows the same principles as in
>> the previous version of that specification (IDNA2003). It
>> thus provides users consistency between old and new versions.
>> A compatibility mechanism that supports internationalized
>> domain names valid under the IDNA2003 specification and the
>> IDNA2008 specification. This second feature allows browsers,
>> search engines, and other clients to handle both old and new
>> domain names during the transitional period until registries
>> update their rules to follow IDNA2008.
>>
>> UTS #46 supplies normative data tables that are synchronized
>> with the latest version of the Unicode Standard, allowing
>> implementations to update without recalculation. This new
>> version also provides an "NV8" flag in the data files, making
>> it easier for implementations to disable the compatibility
>> mechanism.
>





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FW: UTS #46, Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing, Version 6.1 Released

Mark Davis ☕
That's a misrepresentation of what happened, and what resulted.

What the consortium members (many of whom have major browser or search engine implementations) concluded is that because IDNA2008 breaks backwards compatibility, many people could not move immediately to deployment. The document, if you look at it, provides a transitional mechanism specifically for the period when registries have not yet adopted IDNA2008, but people want their browsers and search engines to still work.

The main change in the new version is that it adds a field specifically for IDNA2008 conformance, to help people moving off of the transitional mechanism.

Mark
— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —


On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 17:44, John C Klensin <[hidden email]> wrote:
If the question is really about UTS #46, I'd encourage everyone
relevant to read RFC 5704, substituting IDNA and various Unicode
actions for MPLS and ITU-T as needed.   The point is roughly the
same: the Unicode Consortium decided that a (somewhat
incompatible) "improvement" to IDNA was needed, could not get
consensus for that specification in the IETF, and so went off
and wrote their own.