Dan Oscarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IETF should refer to official standards organisations if possible.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think ISO-10646 does not define normalization forms or case folding. Therefore IDNA cannot avoid referencing Unicode. Once we reference Unicode, there's no point in referencing ISO-10646, because it doesn't contain anything of interest that isn't already in Unicode. Wouldn't it be ironic for the IETF to dismiss another standard-producing organization as not being official enough? Hasn't that same charge historically been made against the IETF itself? For practical reasons, isn't it preferable to reference a spec that's easily available? The Unicode standard is on the web for anyone to view at no charge. Is the same true of ISO-10646? AMC
