Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



seems odd to me too, James.

vint


On Jul 3, 2008, at 6:14 PM, James Seng wrote:

At the moment, the condition is "no single Unicode code point." To
the extent that a single CJK ideograph can be expressed using a
single Unicode code point, this would represent the situation to
which you say you would object. I will dig through my notes to find
out why the "single character" condition was adopted -

Would you be able to explain why the condition is "no single Unicode
code point"? Whats the technical basis for that?

-James Seng
_______________________________________________
Idna-update mailing list
Idna-update@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]