Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
With the original subject, let's discuss examples with Latin
characters only.
> i think the fundamental issue here is not to accept meaningless, or
> meaning-loosing reasonings by imagined similarity.
Unless the reasonings are formerly described, it is impossible
to operate international zones, especially root zones.
Note also that, just as a meaningless label
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
is accepted today, a label with 20 characters of 'y' with dieaeresis
will be acceptable, which causes exponential explosion.
> case is not a
> property of han script(s). when non-specialists imagine that han
> script(s) have a case-like property and then try to reason about han
> script(s), error arises.
Beyond simple case but still within ASCII, how about Dutch
example where "IJ" and 'Y' are equivalent?
Is a label
YYY
equivalent to
IJIJIJ
?
This case should be resolved in a way compatible to the current
rules for ASCII-only labels.
But, we do need precise definitions on character/string
equivalences.
>> And, the definition used for TLDs must be international one.
>
> while this sounds nice, in practice it means that the operators
> of the two constellations of name servers that support two
> mostly identical views of "." must agree,
Not necessarily.
An international definition could be a transitive closure of
equivalences of all the possible locales.
> and from november
> 2001 to the very recent present, there was a substantial
> area of disagreement between these two operator communities
> over a charset issue.
I don't know what is the disagreement but I know it is not
an issued to be resolved here.
Masataka Ohta
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
