> The solution I proposed above avoids the problem, and has no significant > disadvantages in the context of IDN. It is a straightforward change to > the nameprep folding table, that stays within the current model of a > stringprep profile. I'm certainly not suggesting redesigning NFC or NFKC.
In this case, I suggest you follow up with the Nameprep Design team. I have cc: them above. > Am I reading the same document: > <http://www.i-d-n.net/ietf49/idn-sandiego-nameprep-design-team-report.pp t>? Yes, the note is brief. But the presentation is much more in detail. Anyway, I am probably interested in one point. :-) > > Goal & Milestone: > > Nov 2001 domain name identifiers normalization draft last call > > This is completely unrealistic. There are many unresolved issues concerning > normalisation. What would you counter propose to make this realistic? -James Seng
