One issue with reordering that hasn't been put on the table is that, as a process, I'm concerned that it might never complete. This concern is in addition to the other concerns I've seen expressed on the list.
Suppose that we start of defining a reordering scheme that allows for longer labels for some set of languages/scripts. Suppose this gets tested etc. and finished in the WG. Duing IETF last call somebody objects that their favorite language/script doesn't get the same benefits. What happens? If we have accepted to do reordering for some languages/scripts what technical argument do we have for saying "no" to any particular language/script? In worst case the above can repeat over and over - each new attempt at improving the maximum length labels for some subset of the worlds languages/scripts can result in requests to add yet another language/script to the set that needs to be supported. Thus as far as I can tell embarking on solving reording as a pre-cursor to getting IDN specified and usable, might result in delaying IDN for an undetermined amount of time. Erik
