W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > January 2017

Re: Unicode IDNA feedback

From: Mark Davis ⚖ <markdavis@google.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 12:03:25 +0100
Message-ID: <CAA=6ZDVtvyPuOpVP4a=WFgDOx_5XCyR73FzDKSSw7oDmZ=vu7Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Sebastian Mayr <github@smayr.name>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Markus Scherer <mscherer@google.com>, Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜) <jungshik@google.com>, Michel SUIGNARD <Michel@suignard.com>, Mark Davis <mark@macchiato.com>
Thanks for reminding me.

I put together a working doc (https://goo.gl/Kqvpfh) for producing a
proposal for the upcoming UTC meeting. Could you look it over to make sure
that I've captured each of the issues?

And any comments you have on the suggested disposition are welcome! The doc
is shared for comments, so you can either leave sidebar comments or add
suggested text (going into "Suggest Mode" at the top right).

Also, best to have future correspondence go just to my external email,
mark@macchiato.com.

Mark

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Mark Davis ⚖ <markdavis@google.com>
> wrote:
> > Traveling now so will be next week before I can look at this.
>
> Hey Mark, belated happy holidays. Would you be able to look into this now?
>
>
> > On Nov 21, 2016 01:39, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
> >> Hi Mark,
> >>
> >> As you might recall we track IDNA issues that affect the URL Standard
> >> through https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/53. The last set of
> >> feedback was recorded here http://www.unicode.org/review/pri317/ and
> >> apparently closed without it being addressed. Could you perhaps shed
> >> some light on that?
> >>
> >> Somewhat related, now both Firefox and Safari use
> >> Nontransitional_Processing (i.e., IDNA2008), which for now is still
> >> against the URL Standard as that requires Transitional_Processing, but
> >> I think the time has come to change that.
> >>
> >> The commit message at https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/208902 is
> >> pretty detailed on the specifics. It turns out that some of the
> >> implemented processing steps are SHOULD-level requirements in UTS46. I
> >> think these should be refactored to be options for the ToASCII and
> >> ToUnicode algorithms, so the URL Standard can enforce them. It does
> >> not seem great to allow variable processing.
>
>
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>
Received on Friday, 6 January 2017 11:04:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 6 January 2017 11:04:18 UTC