W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 2014

RE: Standardizing on IDNA 2003 in the URL Standard

From: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:18:17 +0000
To: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <public-iri@w3.org>, "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>, "IDNA update work" <idna-update@alvestrand.no>, www-tag.w3.org <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <35a11f84ae184b1ba182a5a4bc1a0850@BY2PR03MB491.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
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.

Received on Thursday, 16 January 2014 17:19:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 10 October 2021 22:17:57 UTC