If you're reading the text as implying that IdentifierClass is somehow guaranteed safe, then I _think_ we still have a problem, because I don't think it says that and anyway it isn't true.
A -- Andrew Sullivan Please excuse my clumbsy thums. > On Feb 5, 2015, at 5:23, "Martin J. Dürst" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 2015/02/05 15:04, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> * Pete Resnick wrote: >>> Ah, so perhaps reversing it, and being more specific, would be better: >>> >>> Even so, implementations that are sensitive to the advice given in >>> this specification (to use the more restrictive IdentifierClass >>> whenever possible, or otherwise to only allow a restricted set of >>> characters in the FreeformClass, particularly avoiding ones whose >>> implications they don't actually understand) are unlikely to run >>> into significant problems as a consequence of these issues or >>> potential changes. >>> >>> Is that clearer for everyone? >> >> Yes, thank you. > > I think the above should work. Giving that it's the most busy time of the > Japanese academic year, I haven't been able to follow the discussion in as > much detail as I would have wanted, but I remember that quite some time ago, > I was very much concerned by phrases along the line of "only allow those > characters whose implications they fully understand". > > Except maybe for two or three people on the Unicode Technical Committee I > know, I wouldn't want to claim that anybody knows the implications of even a > significant (in terms of size and use) part of the Unicode repertoire. And > for the average implementer or system administrator, it's of course much > less. But we definitely don't want that to lead to a situation where we go > back to (some time) last century and ASCII only. > > Given that the text is now very clearly predicated on FreeformClass, which is > indeed wide open, it looks okay. > > Regards, Martin. > > _______________________________________________ > precis mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
