The problem is we cannot determine what is useful and what is not. For example, SGNIC may decide that it only allows Han Ideograph, Tamil scripts and US-ASCII only. JPNIC may decide otherwise. Perhaps some registery in future things 'symbol-drawing' is useful (e.g. a registry for trademark).
I suggest we follow the simple-and-dumb rule for IDN. idn -> any ucs characters subjected to nameprep prohibition (section 5) ihn -> ...registry define themselves... application can use nameprep to "check" idn. -James Seng ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Crocker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "John C Klensin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Eric A. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "IDN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 7:48 AM Subject: Re: [idn] hostname history hell > At 05:38 PM 11/20/2001 -0500, John C Klensin wrote: > >I would like to think of the IDN work > >as expanding that model to include additional alphabetic and > >ideographic characters, rather than discarding the model and > >seeing how much "stuff" we can put in. > > > >If a too-restrictive model turns out to be a mistake, it is > >possible to expand it later (just as "leading digit" was > >unblocked); if we adopt a model that turns out to be too broad, > >there is probably no way back. > > The main reason I am responding is because I believe the above text states > the fundamental issue and conclusion (in opposite order) and want to > suggest that people consider John's text very carefully. > > In general, we need a BASIC capability now and can consider enhancements > later. We cannot, as John observes, take back things that should not have > been added. > > d/ > > > ---------- > Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com> > tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 > >
