-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- James Seng wrote: > Dan Bernstein wrote: > > James Seng writes: > > > The email protests from Taiwan is not against the current set of drafts > > > > Liar. > > Really? Do I need to response to this futher then? > I mean, for what I say, to you is just a lie. *laugh*.
It's completely ridiculous to claim that the protests were not against the current set of IDN drafts. Regardless of their technical merit, they were clearly directed at the current set of drafts. Claiming that they were not directed at IDNA specifically would be a red herring even if it were true: the last call is for all of the documents. There were objections on other issues as well, which you seem to have completely ignored. I'll talk about those in another post. It's obvious that several of the IDNA proponents have a personality clash with Bernstein, and it's also obvious that this is harming the standards process in this WG. *GET OVER IT*, and at least attempt to address his technical objections. Bernstein: *STOP INSULTING PEOPLE*; you're just giving them an excuse to ignore those objections. - -- David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/ RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5 0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01 Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBPJGstzkCAxeYt5gVAQHIugf/Y0gCoOPpjVqAksc9HCsI1d4dQBDhFU6I RdBQwYDJqNrzDlaT/E8J2AlVLuXOZ1iI/zW5JNplDB9eaAt/HnRKT6ld7uFYHt8f MBgIlJHBhpfH2kqgpOKuaTJlUfcMXGmIHsQuymxMfihrSfTCO5wvabb9HAMr9Z1J 6PgVYkivVxfh3HkzoDzapImAfgIA8X3TnzFKwazOM14+gk/tVUe2NGh6M4zllivG HM1nf6pJympV4DRUbKRwTix0elBVdKqmr2WDNN5xogRJoWDgMRdJTERm9fUGLWib lAwj1PrzssXMRTZfO9YcSMrTV7uzE6G4L/MLFDjI3QLOXOwHtf7mhA== =LD8R -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
