Re: Re: Standardizing on IDNA 2003 in the URL Standard from Jiankang Yao on 2014-01-16 (www-tag@w3.org from January 2014)

From: Jiankang Yao <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:07:36 +0800
To: "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>, "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <public-iri@w3.org>, "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>, "John C Klensin" <klensin@jck.com>, "IDNA update work" <idna-update@alvestrand.no>, "Vint Cerf" <vint@google.com>, www-tag.w3.org <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2014011610071066091020@cnnic.cn>




From: Andrew Sullivan
Date: 2014-01-16 01:19
To: Anne van Kesteren
CC: Mark Davis ?; PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG; uri@w3.org; John C Klensin; IDNA update work; Vint Cerf; www-tag.w3.org
Subject: Re: Standardizing on IDNA 2003 in the URL Standard

>IDNA2008 has no effect at all on "A.com" or "a.com".

>IDNA2008 does say that "Aà.com" is not PVALID.  
>

  In which section of rfc idnabis does say some meaning related to  that " "Aà.com" is not PVALID"?

I check Aà.com in verisign conversion tool, it shows "xn--a-sfa.com"

http://mct.verisign-grs.com/convertServlet?input=A%C3%A0.com 

does it follow idna2003 instead of idnabis?


Jiankang Yao

Received on Thursday, 16 January 2014 02:08:07 UTC