Re: i18n requirements (was: Re: NF* (Re: PKCS#11 URI slot attributes & l

> On 2 jan 2015, at 15:30, John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> --On Friday, 02 January, 2015 07:57 +0100 Patrik Fältström
> <paf(_at_)frobbit(_dot_)se> wrote:
>
> > For the record, I like what is suggested the below.
> Wfm, but please note the other comments in my prior note.  To
> summarize, normalization is not the only issue.  Even for some
> normalization cases, NFC is not the cure.
This is why I think the way NFC is mentioned is correct.

> For example, NFKC is
> needed to rationalize characters of various widths but causes
> problems elsewhere.  So, I would suggest some additional words
> that say, more or less, that, until PKCS#11 is revised to be
> clear about how to handle characters outside the ASCII
> repertoire, those who discover a need to use such characters
> should be cautious, conservative, and expend extra effort to be
> sure they know what they are doing and that failure to do so
> will create both operational and security risks.
Having this clarification explicit and not only implicit would make the text 
even better.

   Patrik

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail