Eliot
On 29.01.23 18:49, Rob Sayre wrote:
Hi,That all sounds reasonable. But isn't this WG being incredibly intransigent by default? It was like pulling teeth to get the last RFC to say it's ok to ship only TLS 1.3 (2018), and now I guess we're refusing to accept that there are emoji domain names, even though they obviously exist. Maybe the best thing to do is break every rule from IDNA2008 that passes UTS-46, and put it on the internet. I bet the WHATWG already did this, but another effort couldn't hurt.thanks, Rob On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 1:42 AM Eliot Lear <l...@lear.ch> wrote: Hi Rob On 29.01.23 00:03, Rob Sayre wrote:The biggest value any internet standards organization provides isa global namespace.Different people have different values. To me, a global namespace is merely a means to one or more ends, and bigger may or may not be better. The ends I expect out of this organization are: 1. Utility 2. Interoperability 3. A reasonable (albeit not perfect) security profile for a function that implements the standard. It seems that different people order these things differently in priority (and they are not unrelated to one another), and are assessing (3) very differently. Eliot _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
