From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Oct 21 2002 - 07:49:05 CDT
In <8Z9ARreZcDC@3247.org> list-ietf-wg-apps-usefor@faerber.muc.de (Claus Färber) writes:
>Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> schrieb/wrote:
>> Which would be hard if the canonical form were to be some encoded form.
>Why? We'd just have a canonical "user-friendly" (consisting of human-
>readable characters) and a canonical "machine-friendly" (consisting of
>octets) form. The mapping between them is just not ASCII but, for
>example, Punycode.
No, you would initially have a "machine-friendly" (e.g. punycode) form for
both humans and machines. Later on there might or might not be some
universally deployed "prettyname" feature on top of it (but we are agreed
that is future work).
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5