Lisa Dusseault <lisa.dusseault@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:42 AM, Simon Josefsson <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I object to publishing these IDNA documents as a Draft Standard. I >> don't view IDNA2008 as a revision of the earlier IDNA2003 protocol. The >> design goals have changed since the first IDNA version. Finally, there >> have been little implementation experience with the new protocol. >> >> I would support publication as Proposed Standard. >> > You are absolutely correct and this is a pilot error on my part. I > didn't notice the documents were automatically listed as going for > Draft Standard in the tracking tools when I issued the Last Call. SM > pointed out that the Last Call announcement mentioned implementation > reports but I didn't realize what caused that error. I will look into > fixing this and reissuing the Last Call announcements. Thanks -- I didn't read the discussion on the mailing list about the mistake until now, and I assumed the intention really was to go for Draft Standard. I am happy that it was just a mistake and I am sorry if my comment felt confrontational. /Simon _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf