Dan Oscarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now when we expand the allowed characters in a domain name, then > allowed characters and syntax should follow the same rules: > - The labels of a domain name is separated by "full stop" U+002E > and are written from left to right with least significant label > first. > Other characters or display form may be used in user interfaces > but have to be converted into standard form in protocols.
IDNA says virtually nothing about how IDNs are to be represented in new protocols. New protocols can use the ASCII representation, or an unconstrained Unicode representation (like UTF-8), or can define their own more restricted representation (for example, nameprepped UTF-8 using only U+002E as separator). Although IDNA says that the other dot characters must be recognized as dots, it does not say that they must be allowed in new protocols. If a new protocol forbids the other dot characters, recognizing them as dots will be a no-op. IDNA says that old protocols must use the ASCII representation, using only U+002E as dots. There has never been a consensus on a particular non-ASCII representation for use in new protocols, and we don't need one in order to start deploying IDNA. That's why IDNA is silent on that issue. AMC
