- From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:23:03 -0700
- To: Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>
- Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
At 11:10 AM +0100 6/10/08, Gervase Markham wrote: >Kim Davies wrote: >> This thread sounds remarkably like deja vu. Indeed, the TLD community was >> rather upset a few years ago by Mozilla taking unilateral action to >> introduce a hard-coded white-list of acceptable IDN TLDs without prior >> consultation. > >That's unfortunate; but I must say this upset was not communicated to me. > >That policy of ours should have no effect whatsoever on TLDs with a >responsible attitude to homographs. Our registration requirements are >not onerous. For your IDN display technology, Mozilla decides which TLDs have a "responsible attitude". Mozilla enforces these rules as a "powerful incentive" for TLDs to do as Mozilla wishes. In doing so, Mozilla degrades the user experience of TLDs that don't go along with the Mozilla rules, such as .com/.net and ccTLDs throughout the world. The Mozilla "public suffix list" may prove to be similar. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2008 17:25:24 UTC