John and I talked today about how to solve our impasse with the PRECIS
framework document. I think we have reached a mutually tolerable (note
that I didn't say "agreeable") path forward:
The key issue for John is the differences between IDNA and PRECIS rules.
If a change to Unicode occurs, the Designated Expert(s) for IDNA and
PRECIS (which will likely be the same person(s)) will have to separately
figure out the impact of the change to IDNA and PRECIS and update the
rules (and tables) for each accordingly. Without guidance in the
document as to what those differences are, the job of updating becomes
significantly harder.
So, the thing we can do (short of restructuring the document) that will
address John's concern is to add some prose that describes how each of
the PRECIS Classes differs from the IDNA rules so that a Designated
Expert who is looking at any Unicode change can figure out what impact
it has on each of the rule sets in one pass and can update them
accordingly. That seems to me a perfectly reasonable approach, and will
unstick this document in a way that John can live with and will give
other protocols, which are now waiting, *something* to refer to.
Thoughts? Comments?
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
_______________________________________________
precis mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
