RE: Standardizing on IDNA 2003 in the URL Standard

It bounced sort of, trying again with fewer recipients?

From: Shawn Steele [mailto:Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:15 AM
To: Mark Davis ☕; Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Gervase Markham; yaojk; Paul Hoffman; PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG; uri@w3.org; John C Klensin; IDNA update work; www-tag.w3.org
Subject: RE: Standardizing on IDNA 2003 in the URL Standard

> UTS 46 will stay around, if only for the mapping layer.

> Whether the rest would be used by clients really depends on the progress made by registries.
> As for the deviation-character support, I think implementations could stop supporting them if the affected
> registries enforced bundle-or-block.

I’m not sure that’s trivial.  Would all of the next layers enforce them?  (Blogspot.com for example, I have no clue what, if anything, blogspot does for IDN, but it’s a place that allows random users to create domain names).  How would we know?

Some of the registrars also originally stated that they didn’t want to bundle.

> As to the additional symbols, implementations could stop ​supporting them if the registries forbade them.

Same thing.

-Shawn
​