Keith Moore wrote:
it's a false dichotomy.
first, there are probably some purposes for which identifiers
(including DNS names) should stay ASCII (and not even 10646
encoded as ASCII) for the forseeable purpose.
Agreed. Well-known data-types such as Message-ID are actually harmed if
they exist in multiple forms (this also includes the transliterated form
that results from IDNA). This is why implementation is a per-WG effort,
not a global mandate. However, the infrastructure (in the broadest sense)
should support native IDNs in order to facilitate the most effective
scoping for any WG.
a UTF-8 everywhere approache forces him to wait for everybody
else to adopt IDNs before he can use them.
lol, speaking of false dichotomies
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/