-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Soobok Lee wrote: > From: "Bruce Thomson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Thanks for the comments David. I will include your modifications in > > my report. > > > > Just one clarification: > > > > > > The algorithm would probably be frozen for all time. > > > > > > I agree that these are not problems if the reordering is actually > > > and *definitely* frozen for all time, but Soobok Lee was arguing that > > > it could be updated for new scripts. > > It depends on whether or not nameprep's "query" could contain unassigned > code points (UCP).
It can. > If yes, adding is impossible. But even in this case, There is a half-baked > proposal : [snip] Precisely: it is half-baked and introduces lots of problems. I won't spend any more time refuting it unless the straw poll supports reordering (which I think is very unlikely). - -- David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/ RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5 0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01 Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBO/Dc/DkCAxeYt5gVAQFV1wgAmufRFy/SUjScD2OQeTP6Zua+DW8g5WZu VuMv8kAaYrbuAV1u2E4aoiHl1dMa8AiNHmRmcMwLqb5Ix2zuLCL8IyWLjU5JEUMD fnKQwjDXZVF+KbyLXE8RFow/lURm0vgwphHXUmzQ5tLzZz3Yd5jYz7xgh0gmFWUr GNlVVPOBbmkYRZHxJmpxv1UGpChHJTjQQ4oNeX8FGBUIKAILygAb6IWFCHKn5Jc/ 2wMvt3jYMhSlk91S4Xw1KafQ2TS83IfgbZ5o1v+HgYeFIZBj2FjdGQxBFGNy8/Pt Rfg7R7s1TR6b434clmZskDz4Vm0rnlwPcm6ofFrBS81VD6GWH0Ap2g== =Zs91 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
