On 4/24/14, 9:17 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 4/24/14 9:19 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
It's good to hear that it won't be burdensome, but it still seems that
the working group produced an incomplete document.
Sort of. The problem is that it really isn't the IETF's expertise or
responsibility to create that sort of document. In fact what would be
ideal is to point to a document or registry controlled by the Unicode
Consortium. But the conclusion of the community during IDNA was that we
would not be provided such a stable reference. Given that, IDNA did a
de-reference; we'd create an IANA registry, run by a Unicode expert, but
that tracked the state of the properties that we needed for our
purposes. Not pretty or ideal, but practical. This WG followed that
lead, I think equally pragmatically.
As you say, water under the bridge. I got email back and Patrik has
agreed to be the expert; I'll add a management item during agenda bash.
He'll prepare the contents of the registry and we should be good to go.
Pete, with regard to the issue raised in the ops-dir review and
elsewhere, how would you prefer to handle the 30-page codepoint table?
Make it the initial registration (subject, of course, to designated
expert review) or discard it as the scaffolding it is?
Peter
_______________________________________________
precis mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
