Re: UCD stability

From: Erik van der Poel (
Date: Fri Mar 11 2005 - 17:12:14 CST

  • Next message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: UCD stability"

    I agree, and I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was trying to
    prevent Unicode from fixing its properties. I did not mean to imply that.

    The IETF *is* concerned about the stability of the normalization table
    since that *could* be dangerous in the DNS case. I heard that Unicode
    and IETF have some kind of agreement about normalization table
    stability, but I can't seem to find it via Google right now. I did find
    the following:

    Unicode does publish the changes in the normalizations, so the IETF can
    decide whether or not to incorporate them in their specs:


    Markus Scherer wrote:
    > So what you need is an IDN-specific inclusion list that you could
    > initially base on Unicode properties, minus confusables or whatever
    > criteria you want to use, and then this list is kept stable in an
    > IDN-specific standard. No need to prevent Unicode from fixing its
    > properties.
    > markus
    > On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:23:59 -0800, Erik van der Poel
    > <> wrote:
    >>There is some evidence that the IDN Working Group had a concern that the
    >>General Category Value in the UCD was not very stable, and that it might
    >>not be a good idea to base an Internet standard on something like that.
    >>As it turns out, Unicode includes U+16C1, a Runic Letter that looks like
    >>the vertical bar (|). This would argue that IDNs should not just be
    >>limited to Unicode's Letter, Number and Mark categories. They should
    >>also disallow certain Unicode blocks, such as the Runic block, *for
    >>now*. ...

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 11 2005 - 17:12:56 CST