This is CDNC final comments. Please respect their experties
in dealing with large character sets. Yes, it is difficult to
standardize character mapping tables, as we know well
enough. Without the mapping tables there is no IDN either.
Yes, you are right on divide and conquor. What is
At 09:07 PM 6/7/2002 -0700, liana Ye wrote:
This is CDNC final comments. Please respect their experties
in dealing with large character sets.
The IETF has showed a great deal of respect for that expertise. It is the
reason the IETF has extended discussion about IDN much, much longer than
was
I have no doubt some of the concerns are very real (others are red herrings) .
The question is whether we have a solution that have rough consensus or not to
address these valid concerns.
When we have acceptable solutions to these concerns, then we can discuss them.
-James Seng
Gee, maybe
At 09:16 PM 6/7/2002 +0900, Soobok Lee wrote:
Your above defense of premature and lacking-of-consensus IDN standards
won't work
If you review the amount of time spent on developing this work, you will
discover that it is a long way from premature. Quite the contrary. The
work has gone on
on 6/8/2002 4:00 PM Dave Crocker said the following:
If you review the amount of time spent on developing this work, you will
discover that it is a long way from premature. Quite the contrary. The
work has gone on approximately two years longer than it needed to.
the process has
- Original Message -
From: Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On the plus side, the nature of the model is called divide and conquor. To
make a complex problem tractable, solve as little of it as is practical,
using an many existing component solutions as can be found.
My own belief
At 12:52 PM +0200 6/6/02, Simon Josefsson wrote:
This means IDN is not guaranteed to be secure on non-Unicode systems.
There are alot of non-Unicode systems out there today...
Nothing is ever guaranteed to be secure. Even if we supplied mapping
tables, there is no guarantee that the mapping
Simon Josefsson simon plus idn at josefsson dot org wrote:
It has never been a goal of IDN to create equivalence between
different character sets.
This means IDN is not guaranteed to be secure on non-Unicode systems.
There are alot of non-Unicode systems out there today...
This problem,
