- From: Wil Tan <wil@dready.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:14:48 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTi=FX+TfyWpgmMNmfEZYzEnE0UVJqi_je1Wavd8F@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote: > Hi, > > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-01#section-3.4>: > > Replace the ireg-name part of the IRI by the part converted using the > ToASCII operation specified in Section 4.1 of [RFC3490] on each dot- > separated label, and by using U+002E (FULL STOP) as a label > separator, with the flag UseSTD3ASCIIRules set to FALSE, and with the > flag AllowUnassigned set to FALSE. The ToASCII operation may fail, > but this would mean that the IRI cannot be resolved. In such cases, > if the domain name conversion fails, then the entire IRI conversion > fails. Processors that have no mechanism for signalling a failure > MAY instead substitute an otherwise invalid host name, although such > processing SHOULD be avoided. > > In August, RFC 3490 has been obsoleted by RFC 5890/91. > > What's the right reference for ToASCII now? > > The closest thing would be sections 5.1 to 5.5 of RFC 5891, but simply referencing them will lead to incompatibility (e.g. producing different A-labels from the IDNA2003 version.) http://unicode.org/reports/tr46/ details a good transition strategy, but I wonder how one could work that into iri-bis. .wil
Received on Tuesday, 7 September 2010 12:15:20 UTC