On Mar 18, "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to> wrote: > More importantly, in the absence of consensus, the status quo wins. > Something is seriously wrong when an internationalization proposal draws > objections from hundreds of Chinese-speaking users, for example. Now *that's* a convincing argument. However, the status quo in this case is broken. OK, let me rephrase - it's broken for people in China who don't understand the latin alphabet or who want their e-mail addresses outside of USASCII 0-127. Something *should* be done, but your argument has a hint of 'I never want anything done, ever' about it, which is putting people off. My current understanding is that the majority of debate appears to be about interoperability with legacy applications - to me, it sounds a little like the brain-dead 'we can't roll out IPv6 as it breaks IPv4' argument. In other words, the code re-write and upgrde is going to have to happen sometime. You just appear to want to put it off whilst we all sit around and procrastinate for a while. History has shown this is not a Good Plan. However, the more I start to re-read docs and think about it, the more I am convincing myself that you may be right. -- Paul Robinson