- From: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:49:34 -0400
- To: Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>
- cc: Vint Cerf <vint@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, IDNA update work <idna-update@alvestrand.no>, "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <public-iri@w3.org>, uri@w3.org, "www-tag.w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Mark, Excellent. Have a good vacation; let's talk after the 3rd. john --On Saturday, August 24, 2013 14:40 +0200 Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com> wrote: > There's been a flurry of activity on this list. I'm on > vacation, and won't be able to respond much for a > bit > , b > ut > I'll > make just a couple of brief comments. > > With reference to your comments below, I think that many > people's views have evolved in the last four years. I'm sure > that Unicode Consortium would be glad to work together on > improving UTF46. As you say, we are in a bit of a chicken and > egg situation between registries and browsers, so a clearer > path forward to IDNA2008 would be great. (And in retrospect, I > so wish that IDNA2003 had been built along the IDNA2008 > architecture—would have saved us all so much pain!) > > The key is an effective > transition plan > for #2/#3 > . > I put out some strawman ideas on this list, but clearly there > needs to be more discussion. I think everyone recognizes that > we won't get to zero "breaking" IDNA2003 URLs; the goal should > be to get to a small enough number that the major players feel > comfortable flipping the switch on the remaining ones. > > Back on Sept 9.
Received on Saturday, 24 August 2013 14:50:10 UTC