From: Forrest J. Cavalier III (mibsoft@epix.net)
Date: Sun Mar 02 2003 - 23:47:09 CST
> No, becausde if a future draft wanted to do I18N names properly, using
> UTF-8, it would not be compatile with an interim I18N of names using
> punycode.
1. How will an existing punycoded name interfere with creating a raw UTF-8
newsgroup name (_if_ they were to be standardized?)
2. Do you understand the inconsistency that you think it is fine that
the present draft requires upgraded injection agents everywhere (to
allow moderation to work), but you think it impossible that a
future draft requires upgraded injection agents (to convert punycoded
names to raw UTF-8)?
3. Since the IETF is in charge, there will be no USEFOR draft of I18N names
which requires upgrading injection agents. So the previous points are moot.
4. punycode does implement I18N "properly", but it may not have your "blessing."
Don't confuse religion with engineering.
So, any technical criticism of what I outlined?
> But as newgroup-names those would be incredibly ugly. If it were a choice
> between doing that and not having I18N names at all, then I would prefer
> not to have I18N names at all.
Get out of the way then. Because when you say you prefer "nothing"
instead of "ugly" that makes it clear that you approach this task as
an uncompromising artist.
Artists make poor engineers. They pay attention to the wrong things and
solve the wrong problems. They expect to "enlighten" user attitudes
and ideas to get their work accepted. Their design takes too long,
and they "live on typicals." (Any decent engineer recognizes "living
on typicals" as one of the worst insults that could be made of engineering
work. It means to not handle all worst cases when you could and
should have, by using statistics to show how many cases do work
successfully.)
That "E" in IETF stands for Engineering. Go paint if you want
art and beauty.