On 11/15/10 6:19 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
Every draft on internationlization is not an
opportunity to re-explore the rathole down which the IDNABIS working
group laboured for several years.
+<U+221E>
...
well, there are issues that the original idn, and the later idnabis
working groups didn't examine as exhaustively as others, and to assume
that every issue related to i18n and/or l10n on or off the wire was
adequately addressed by one or both is very, very generous.
While I agree with the intent, I suspect we'll be revisiting this issue in the relatively near-term when
folks realize that "1*63(ALPHA)" means they can't have their "fun4u" or "2go"
TLDs.
That one was surfaced at the Mexico ICANN, with some bright young
thing dreaming of ".4u", presenting at least two problems in presumed
policy land.
Eric
P.S. The bright young thing's idea has been on a major registry
platform provider's list of applications-in-hand subsequent to the
Mexico meeting.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
