Re: [idn] Thoughts on nameprep

[Bruce Thomson]

> But if two implementations do it differently, they will look up different > domain names. > That's the whole reason. I understand that is the motivation for nameprep to repair "bad" names into "good" ones. But my point was that at least for Japanese, and I suspect for other languages as well, that anybody who has gotten to the point where they can reliably enter a user name and password in the language will already be able to enter a domain name. Microsoft has recently been in the business of going beyond the spec to rewrite domain names until they resolve. Adding left-off www.s etc. A bit unsettling for purist geeks like me, but useful I suppose. They also change lower case letters to upper case when I am typing documents in MS Word, and I abhor that, because when it isn't what I want, I can't turn it off. Basically, it seems to me that correcting a user's mistake when he types an illegal character in a domain is on the same level. A fuzzy, friendly, nudge on the elbow to get the user a little further along. But this is basically AI at work. Lots of heuristics, not too predictable. It certainly isn't the kind of thing where people demand consistency. If it works differently on a different browser or not at all, so what? This is especially important when you notice that people think that nameprep is so complicated that it might not be possible to implement it accurately in different resolvers. So there was even a suggestion to move it into the DNS for for consistency. This is would be reasonable if nameprep consistency was a high priority, but it isn't. Burdening the DNS with this is asking for big trouble. The important thing that needs to be in the idn spec is just the legal character set. Even this is likely to change after it is in place. There are just too many countries involved to expect to get it right the first time. Priority should be on getting this nailed down, at least temporarily, and getting this show on the road. Nameprep can wait. It would be wise, also, to learn from the mistakes made when defining other recent specifications. Take, for example, the PCMCIA spec (now called the PC Card spec.) The spec writers came up with an extremely impressive, flexible spec that allowed interoperability between a myriad of different cards and card readers. Unfortunately, though, it was impossible to implement it completely on any given product. So manufacturers would implement maybe 20% of it and declare themselves compatible. The result is the computer I bought yesterday, years after the spec was created, can only handle a subset of existing cards. Thanks a lot. Lets create just the minimum, and get maximum benefit. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harald Alvestrand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bruce Thomson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:41 PM Subject: Re: [idn] Thoughts on nameprep > At 12:39 09/03/2001 +0900, Bruce Thomson wrote: > >Nameprep can and probably will be implemented at the > >application level. Microsoft already prepends www. and > >appends .com if I leave them off. They can handle this > >kind of thing. But what is the pressure to put it in the spec? > > as you say, all implementations can, and probably will, handle "this kind > of thing". > But if two implementations do it differently, they will look up different > domain names. > That's the whole reason. > > -- > Harald Tveit Alvestrand, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > +47 41 44 29 94 > Personal email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >