----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dave Crocker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 3:22 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] Working group focus -- and progress
> > The second statement is the more important point: It is the reason that
> > this entire topic is entirely OUT OF SCOPE for this working group.
> ...
> > There is a rumor that some people actually want to use the results of this
> > working group, and that they want to use the results AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
>
> ...regardless of whether or not those results work well.
>
> yes, I am quite sure that you are correct.
>
> it's also clear that any DNS-compatible solution will have significant
> problems with transcription (either written to typed or audible to typed)
> in some languages.
>
> addressing this may be out of scope for this WG, but that doesn't mean
> that IDNs can be made to work well without addressing it.
>
> and yet this WG clearly lacks sufficient expertise to solve this problem
> no matter what the WG charter says.
I agree. Moreover, even if we have the expertise,
most problems cannot be solved by mechanical processing
like nameprep which is designed to be a "utility" for
input convenience and matching of IDN labels,
_NOT_ to be the complete solution to ambiguities
introduced by i18n characters from various scripts.
>
> it appears that the best this WG can do is
>
> - identify known limitations with its approach
>
> - state any known workarounds for those limitations
>
> - define or suggest some mechanism (if any can be found)
> for the IDN resolution infrastructure to be upgraded
> at a later date to better solve the transcription problems.
>
I agree. I am preparing the first (maybe incomplete) BCP for IDN.
I hope someone would make GPLed zone checking tools
based on that.. :-)
soobok
> Keith
>
