- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 11:58:50 +0100
- To: markdavis@google.com
- Cc: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Edward O'Connor" <hober0@gmail.com>, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>, Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Lars Erik Bolstad <lbolstad@opera.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Andrew Overholt <overholt@mozilla.com>, Erik van der Poel <erikv@google.com>, Markus Scherer <mscherer@google.com>, Peter Edberg <pedberg@apple.com>, Michel SUIGNARD <Michel@suignard.com>, Simon Montagu <smontagu@smontagu.org>
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Mark Davis ⚖ <markdavis@google.com> wrote: > Yes, unfortunately the IETF folks didn't learn from the XML 1.1 debacle; the > downside of making a new version incompatible. > > At this point in time, I think the only realistic alternatives are either: > > Stay with 2003 > Use TR46 (http://unicode.org/reports/tr46/#Compatibility_Processing) Thanks for confirming Mark. The stance the URL standard takes at the moment is to side with implementations, and therefore stay with IDNA 2003, but overriding it to require implementations to use the latest version of Unicode rather than Unicode 3.2 (as they already do). http://url.spec.whatwg.org/ -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 19 August 2013 10:59:17 UTC