At 11.16 -0500 01-02-18, John C Klensin wrote:
> > > (1) The IETF is NOT a forum where we have the knowledge on
>> making a decision whether a mapping function is good enough or
>> not for characters. The only thing the IETF can do is to choose
>> someone which works in this area and trust them doing an as
>> good job as possible. UTC is doing a good job, but they have
>> "bugs" and problems with their mapping tables (as anyone would
>> have) and we in the IETF will inherit them -- for good and for
>> bad.
>
>Agreed. But that implies, as above, that we make _zero_ of our
>own rules. If the Nameprep document is more complex than "take
>the UTC rules and apply them" (perhaps in some specific order
>relative to other things that need doing), I think we are out of
>this space and into applying our own judgement... we I think we
>agree we should not do.
I agree with this in principle, BUT, we need still some extra text.
This because we might want to
- prohibit some code points as part of a label (compare with the
problems with having no definition of what is a hostname compared
with definition in DNS protocol to be able to handle decimal values
of 0-255 (inclusive) as part of a label).
- specify what should happen with non-assigned characters (which
solves the versioning problem).
- specify in what order case folding, normalization etc should happen.
paf
