On 05:46 04/09/02, Dave Crocker said: >You think otherwise, so the real question is the basis for YOUR >issues. So far, you appear to be preferring to rely on possible futures, >and on claims that IDNA is somehow special. Yet the implementation and >operational impacts of this specialness has not yet been made clear
Dear Dave, I am afraid you base your comments on what you consider as the standard common today practice. That practice for you today is to use standard writing when sending a mail or entering a domain name. To universally enlarge that capacity (such as using 16 or 64 bytes character coding) is for you a future scenario of middle interest. Our today practice is to be blocked by a passed scenario (8 bits) in not using the standard writing when sending a mail or entering a domain name. We are only trying to remove asap that specialness. Because we do suffer for years of that limited implementation and of the operational impact on all our other application and common life. As if you were obliged to use computers only in Cyrillic uppercases. As long as this has not been accepted, we obviously have an understanding and a wording problem. Which may result into a disinterest, and alternative solutions to be used, there too. jfc
