----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Nordmark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Erik Nordmark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:01 AM Subject: Re: [idn] Which lanuages/scripts to reorder?
> > Eric, > > > The process, if any, of future revision of thie WG's product, again, if any, > > is important. Either there is none, and it is "permanent" until discarded, > > or there is some, which may work (allowing semi-graceful revisioning). > > This is assuming that the WG actually produces something. > My concern in the area of reordering is that incremental requests for > supporting additional laguages/scripts for reordering benefits might mean > that the WG never gets to deliver anything - there are just too many > scripts/languages that can appear. > > Thus my concern is completely unrelated to the version issues > others have brought up with respect to UTC. > > If the WG embarks on doing reordering for 1,2,3,4 languages/scripts > how do we know that this will be sufficient? Next month there might be > requests for a few more languages/scripts. Etc. seamless upgrade idea for adding new script reordering tables and new nameprep rules (NF/casemappings) are described in the posting titled with "suggestion : two prefices ....". No newer prefix other than (zq-- and uq--) will be needed forever. I recommend you to comment on the suggestion first before you go further. Soobok Lee > > Erik > >
