>> I reread the spec, which was a good idea. It says the domain >> names can contain U-labels and NR-LDH ASCII labels, which >> seems correct. That forbids both A-labels and dodgy stuff >> that looks like A-labels but isn't. > >Thanks. That is consistent with my impression. My concern is >that the language and terminology won't make it clear about what >is being specified unless someone is _really_ familiar with IDNA >and the "EAI" specs. It meshes with Patrik's concern that the >wording of the spec won't be clear to someone who is not _very_ >good with English. > >My impression is that there is little problem with the intended >underlying spec, but the document text needs some tuning. Agreed. The subsequent section on comparing names would likely benefit from clearer instructions, e.g. a) if the domain contains A-labels, turn them into U-labels b) if the domain still contains R-LDH labels, stop, not a valid name. c) if the domain contains NR-LDH labels, make them all the same case d) do a straight byte comparison of the addresses R's, John