Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 04:32:08PM +0200,
Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net> wrote
a message of 21 lines which said:
But it is quite common when we revise a specification that we have
only an incomplete defect list. Or we may not have determined if a
particular issue is really a defect. Understanding which specific
issues have to be fixed is typically WG work in a bis spec effort.
But it is not in the charter, quite the contrary. The proposed charter
is written as if there was a consensus on the IDN problems (there is
not, besides the limitation to Unicode 3.2 and may be the bidi). No
work is planned to discuss the problems, only solutions are present in
the charter, already decided even before the WG exists.
The charter is an agenda item at the BOF.
If there's consensus that you're right and the proponents are wrong, we
can change it.
Harald
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf