I agree with Pawel that this is a matter of 9083bis.
Mario
Il 22/05/2025 07:50, Pawel Kowalik ha scritto:
+1, but I don't think extension draft is enough. It will cover only
extension identifiers, object class names, and JSON property names of
future extension. Adding it to extension draft is easy and likely not
harmful in any way though.
Much more interesting would be indeed the string values in responses.
For this we would need a bis of RFC 9083, which would then
automatically cover all aspects of the protocol, not only future
extensions.
If I think we have a real problem to solve at hand, that needs such
action and is worth effort: no. If we ever decide to do 9083bis out of
other reasons it would be then no brainer to add it.
Kind Regards,
Pawel
On 21.05.25 21:43, Jasdip Singh wrote:
*From: *Hollenbeck, Scott <[email protected]>
*Date: *Wednesday, May 21, 2025 at 3:24 PM
*To: *[email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>
*Subject: *[regext] Re: unicode assignables and RDAP extensions
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew (andy) Newton <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 3:21 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] unicode assignables and RDAP extensions
>
> Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do
not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is
> safe.
>
> Hi,
>
> draft-bray-unichars [1], which is currently in IESG evaluation,
describes
> Unicode subsets and the problems with just allowing anything
Unicode in a
> text protocol.
>
> This doc describes "unicode assignables" as the "subset as all the
Unicode code
> points that are not problematic."
>
> I think it would be a good idea for the RDAP extensions draft to
also limit RDAP
> extension identifiers, object class names, and JSON property names
to the
> "unicode assignables" subset.
>
> What do people think?
[SAH] Good idea!
[JS] +1
Since that draft suggests “restricting the contents of object member
names and string values to one of the subsets”, beside naming, should
we also limit string values in the JSON responses for an RDAP extension?
Jasdip
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email [email protected]
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email [email protected]
--
Dott. Mario Loffredo
Senior Technologist
Technological Unit “Digital Innovation”
Institute of Informatics and Telematics (IIT)
National Research Council (CNR)
Address: Via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy
Phone: +39.0503153497
Web:http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
