IETF
lucid@jabber.ietf.org
Wednesday, March 25, 2015< ^ >
Room Configuration
Room Occupants

GMT+0
[13:32:34] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[13:32:38] <marc.blanchet.qc> test
[13:47:06] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[13:48:02] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[13:54:40] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[14:18:41] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[14:19:23] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[14:19:26] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[14:32:16] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[14:38:38] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[14:42:30] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[14:47:19] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[14:50:13] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[15:14:29] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[15:16:49] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[15:25:09] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[15:28:19] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[15:39:55] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[15:41:04] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[15:44:55] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[15:45:59] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[16:01:12] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[16:05:56] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[16:13:10] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[16:29:15] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[16:45:02] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[17:26:49] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[17:27:43] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[17:28:26] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[17:28:30] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[17:35:54] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[17:37:18] stpeter joins the room
[17:39:15] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[17:42:47] <stpeter> hi Marc!
[17:43:00] <marc.blanchet.qc> hello!
[17:45:45] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[17:47:02] Meetecho joins the room
[17:51:46] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[17:54:45] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[17:56:22] Kim Davies joins the room
[17:58:21] ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp joins the room
[17:58:49] Tony Hansen joins the room
[17:59:01] Mats Dufberg joins the room
[17:59:08] John Klensin joins the room
[17:59:18] Tony Hansen leaves the room
[18:00:08] Tony Hansen joins the room
[18:01:55] Aaron Falk joins the room
[18:02:08] yone joins the room
[18:02:29] yone leaves the room
[18:02:40] Franck Martin joins the room
[18:02:41] Yoshiro Yoneya joins the room
[18:02:43] kaorumaeda joins the room
[18:05:00] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> remote audio working ok for people?
[18:05:23] <Mats Dufberg> Yes
[18:05:56] <John Klensin> I'm no longer sure I know what an abstract character is, if that helps :-(
[18:05:58] Francisco Arias joins the room
[18:07:49] <Aaron Falk> Not helping.
[18:07:54] <Aaron Falk> :(
[18:10:16] Shawn Steele joins the room
[18:14:48] <John Klensin> Magnifier and an overlay grid, most likely
[18:15:32] <Aaron Falk> but are they different abstract characters?
[18:15:53] hildjj joins the room
[18:16:01] <John Klensin> If you were onmiscient, you would know that when you saw it.
[18:16:03] Barry Leiba joins the room
[18:16:04] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> the previous slide (14) yes are what Unicode would call different abstract characters
[18:16:11] <hildjj> Meetecho: can you reorient our camera to the speaker, please?
[18:16:33] Shawn Steele leaves the room
[18:16:38] <Meetecho> done! :)
[18:16:39] <hildjj> thx
[18:16:44] John Levine joins the room
[18:17:17] Simon Romano joins the room
[18:17:33] Shawn Steele joins the room
[18:18:13] <hildjj> ƚl̵
[18:18:26] <Aaron Falk> +
[18:18:47] <John Klensin> The font "weight" isn't a property of a code point except when it is.
[18:18:49] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> Bernard Levis at mic
[18:18:57] Suzanne joins the room
[18:19:25] John Levine_me joins the room
[18:19:33] <hildjj> btw, U+0037 isn't correct on this slide.
[18:19:48] <hildjj> U+0037 is DIGIT SEVEN
[18:20:20] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[18:20:22] John Levine_me leaves the room
[18:20:34] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> should be U+0337
[18:20:38] Barry Leiba joins the room
[18:21:03] <hildjj> øo̷
[18:21:25] <hildjj> in this font, one of those isn't bold, i think.
[18:21:32] <John Klensin> Or U+0338, which turns out to be another part of the problem.
[18:21:48] <hildjj>
[18:22:10] <hildjj> o̸øo̷
[18:22:56] <John Klensin> @Hildjj: in theory, font is never coded in Unicode.  In practice, well...
[18:23:22] <hildjj> i didn't mean to imply that.
[18:23:37] <hildjj> i'm just looking to see how similar they look on *my* screen, at the moment.
[18:23:58] <hildjj> some other XMPP clients will actually send font info in some cases, but i don't think this one is.
[18:23:59] <hildjj> My favorite mixed case code point: Dž (U+01C5 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER D WITH SMALL LETTER Z WITH CARON)
[18:24:20] <John Klensin> Mic: In some cases, they not only render the same but have the same name.
[18:24:32] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> there
[18:24:39] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> s 2 folks in line now
[18:24:54] resnick joins the room
[18:25:08] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> if someone doesn't before then I will relay after that
[18:25:51] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> Kerry Lynn at mic
[18:26:40] <John Klensin> Mic: Not only do you not know the language the person decided to write in but you don't know whick IME was used and what its properties are.
[18:27:07] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> mic ack after hildjj
[18:29:40] <hildjj> +1, jck
[18:29:48] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> tony hansen at mic
[18:31:22] <Franck Martin> is there some library that renders "characters" as an image and can tell me it contains this other image?
[18:31:40] <John Klensin> Mic: We _did_ understand the normalization stability rules.  What we didn't understand was the range of choices that could be made when a new, more or less precomposed, character/ code point that was added
[18:33:44] <John Klensin> @Andrew: Fula has been written by humans in lots less than 100 years, just not by very many humabs,  I know people who are still writing Classical Mayan too, just not many of them and not for daily communication.
[18:34:40] <John Klensin> (and not in Unicode, of course)
[18:38:19] <hildjj> Franck: I have some code as a starting point.  I haven't open sourced it yet because it's ugly.
[18:38:30] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> once Andrew is done presenting, someone else will need to monitor jabber for mic relay
[18:38:43] <Barry Leiba> I'll do
[18:39:16] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[18:39:23] <John Klensin> Mic: A sufficiently smark IME could deal with the Ka problem by observing context (e.g., with or without other numerals or associated delimiters).   Whether there are such IMEs is another question.
[18:39:52] <hildjj> s/smark/smart/
[18:40:06] <Mats Dufberg> ARABIC-INDIC DIGITS and EXTENDED ARABIC-INDIC DIGITS actually belong to different Unicode scripts.
[18:40:08] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> @John, I think Andrew already said that a minute ago
[18:40:15] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> do you still want mic relay?
[18:40:48] Jim Galvin joins the room
[18:41:15] <Mats Dufberg> no
[18:41:16] <John Klensin> Yes, it doesn't help with our (odd) identifeirs
[18:41:20] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> I said "3com" off mic since that's what Andrew mentioned earlier
[18:41:23] Barry Leiba joins the room
[18:41:25] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> Jeff Hodges at mic
[18:41:44] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> Joe Hildebrand at mic
[18:42:04] Franck Martin leaves the room
[18:42:51] <hildjj> there are a couple of pics at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_method
[18:43:23] <Shawn Steele> Why don't we care about homoglyphs?  Why a very narrow form of homoglyphs.  This seems like a can't see the forest for the trees problem to me.:p:p
[18:43:24] <stpeter> interesting, to Yutaka's point I chose something other than the default font to display U+53E3 and U+56D7, and in fact they do look different in, say, HanziPen TC Regular than in the font Andrew used
[18:44:25] <Barry Leiba> Shawn: because what you suggest would simply be hopeless.
[18:44:30] <stpeter> Shawn Steele: one reason we care is the point that hildjj made about attacks
[18:45:04] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> use "mic:" if you want a mic relay, otherwise will assume it's side conversation
[18:46:12] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> RFC5895 and UTR46
[18:47:35] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> almost time for me to stop watching jabber... so over to Barry
[18:48:00] <Shawn Steele> These attacks are almost the same as other homoglyphs
[18:48:26] <resnick> Almost.
[18:48:29] netwerkeddude joins the room
[18:49:19] <resnick> More seriously, it is a case of "we can live with this, but not with that", and then it's a matter of where to put the line.
[18:49:25] <Shawn Steele> Mic: Calling it an Ostrich is a bit presumptious
[18:49:54] <netwerkeddude> what is an NFI ?
[18:49:58] <Barry Leiba> Shawn, when we get to mic discussion, you can tell me whether you still want me to channel that.
[18:50:20] <Shawn Steele> This is a case of "we're willing to break these characters because they seem 'fixable'", however there are thousands of other cases that are ignored.
[18:50:33] <John Klensin> Mic: We've also got some identical characters with letter properties in the same script (Latin) that we may need to disallow anyway (see the comments about phonetic descriptors in one of the I-Ds)
[18:50:36] <netwerkeddude> ah NFI = Norm Form IETF
[18:51:30] <John Klensin> Meetecho: is there any way to increase the gain on the floor mics a bit?
[18:51:46] <Meetecho> we'll look, just a sec
[18:52:09] <Shawn Steele> I had to put on headphones :)
[18:52:24] <Meetecho> are other mics fine instead?
[18:53:12] <John Klensin> Andrew is fine, but comments I think are coming from the floor are just barely audible with my local speakers turned all the way up.
[18:54:08] <Shawn Steele> Mic: The "they would use the other one even though it wasn't the character they wanted" really bothers me.
[18:54:51] <John Klensin> @Shawn: it bothers me too even though I agree with what I think Andrew was trying to say
[18:55:18] <Meetecho> I can hear the current question fine, is this one of the mics that is flawed?
[18:55:24] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> like it bothers turks using I in a case-insensitive protocol slot
[18:55:26] <Meetecho> anyway we're sending someone there
[18:55:43] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[18:56:28] Barry Leiba joins the room
[18:57:39] <stpeter> Shawn Steele: when you said "This is a case of "we're willing to break these characters because they seem 'fixable'", however there are thousands of other cases that are ignored." - are you referring to the fact that the universe of confusable characters is broader than the problem under discussion here?
[18:58:20] <John Klensin> As an example, there are a few writing systems that use "European" digits as tone or replication indicators but local-script digits as numerals.
[18:59:04] <stpeter> I feel like we use could dialysis at some level
[18:59:28] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> Henrik at mic
[18:59:50] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> barry leiba at mic
[19:00:22] Franck Martin joins the room
[19:00:59] <Shawn Steele> @stpeter, yes, these universe of confusable characters is much bigger than these few codepoints, and these codepoints are a very small percentage of the possible attack vectors
[19:01:17] <stpeter> Shawn Steele: I totally agree with you on that!
[19:02:02] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> I can vouch for the fact that there exists a user who would use an approximation of a character because it's what available... say in a jabber nickname for instance...
[19:02:45] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> maybe "no one in their right mind would" might be closer though :)
[19:04:03] <John Klensin> @Dave, keep in mind that the examples of "oe", etc., in German are just such approximations when the correct character is not available -- they are old and very much standardized conventions, not an individual user making something up.
[19:04:11] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> true
[19:06:33] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> sounds like a captcha...
[19:07:02] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> (that wasn't serious btw :)
[19:07:45] <John Klensin> @Dave: actually, it requires a rather different distance function from a Captcha.  It does, however, more or less require giving up on Unicode, which some people would find attractive :-)
[19:07:52] stpeter leaves the room: Disconnected: Replaced by new connection
[19:07:53] stpeter joins the room
[19:08:41] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> yes, my analogy was just that comparing the bitmaps was done by humans in the captcha case and hence is fuzzy matching not exact matching
[19:08:52] Jim Galvin leaves the room
[19:08:59] <John Klensin> Of course, one could go back to RFC 5242 8)
[19:09:04] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> which is quite different from what we normally talk about in identifyer comparison
[19:10:45] <John Klensin> Indeed.  Remember that, in the IDNA discusions, we had people who were actively arguing for phonetic/ "sounds-alike" comparisons.   I can't even begin to describe the list of things that are wrong with that, but it has some charm for some cases.
[19:11:36] <Shawn Steele> Mic: Lot's of these "identical" things depend on the font.  Even when the font makes them "identical", its reasonably easy to find a font designer that chose a different direction.
[19:11:49] <John Klensin> Mic: Pete, if those phonetic descriptors are counted, it probably is hundreds but not very many hundreds.
[19:12:08] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> mic has 3 or 4 people but barry is now in line to channel shawn and john
[19:12:11] <John Klensin> (and, yes, those are all within-script)
[19:12:40] <Shawn Steele> mic: so is bundling/blocking an option?
[19:13:19] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> queue is Pete, Stuart, Chris, Marc, then Barry (as Shawn/John)
[19:13:43] Aaron Falk leaves the room
[19:14:13] <John Klensin> Mic: Pete, the difference in practice between option 4 "new property" and item 5 "NFI" may be very slight except in how we define protocols.
[19:16:08] <Shawn Steele> Mic: +1000 on this should be advice :)
[19:17:34] <John Klensin> Mic: (Especially to Chris) As someone who continues to use "+", please see the distinction between "coding artifact" and actual character differences that I made on the LUCID list
[19:17:41] <Barry Leiba> making "mic" comments in immediate context isn't useful, because it'll take a while to get them mic'ed.  Stick to things that are really valuable to have said in the room, please.
[19:19:21] Jim Galvin joins the room
[19:20:01] <netwerkeddude> suggested "directions" in Andrew's preso largely intersect but aren't congruent with those in draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70-04 it seeems -- is this going to be discussed?
[19:20:33] <John Klensin> Mic: Not clear that doing something here other than warn makes interoperability worse-- it might actually make it better becasue of that "same user, different device and IME can yield different strings" problem, resulting in unexpected non-matches.
[19:20:53] <Shawn Steele> Mic: bundling/blocking would be a "direction"
[19:27:18] <John Klensin> Mic: No, Pete, I was assuming 5 could be done on the basis of properties plus probably an exception list (for the same reason we needed an exception list in IDNA)
[19:28:01] <John Klensin> Mic: Andrew, it is also a matter of how we organize protocols because of questions of early or late normalization.
[19:28:26] <Barry Leiba> jck: 5 in q
[19:30:04] naoki joins the room
[19:31:23] <John Klensin> Mic: To part of Dave Crocker's statement, the added complexity driver is that Unicoce isn't fixed -- new code points and scripts keep getting added with new conventions.  So we either adapt of find ourselves back in the "just pick a version of Unicode and stick with it" state.   If we assume that everything that will be added in the future will be obscure, that isn't necessarily a bad idea, but does add some separate implementation complexity as libraries evolve differently.
[19:31:45] <stpeter> Pete, what you say about trying "4" and if that fails falling back to "3" seems OK, but do we have the requisite energy for the "4" level of effort (I am skeptical) and if not then why not go directly to "3"?
[19:32:42] <Tony Hansen> it's like the difference between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry. Change the axioms and there are lots of consequences
[19:33:14] <John Klensin> Mic: "+" was allowed in 821 (not a later addition)
[19:34:09] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[19:34:36] naoki leaves the room
[19:34:52] naoki joins the room
[19:34:59] <resnick> @psa: I'm not convinced I know the effort difference between 3 and 4. We've got to do something obviously.
[19:35:22] <John Klensin> @StPeter: because that "I typed exactly the same thing on two consecutive days and they didn't match" will cause really serious user problems.  I suppose one could try to educate all of them, but it might be easier to just get everyone to use ASCII (and no, that isn't a serious suggestion).
[19:35:30] <stpeter> @resnick: don't just do something, stand there!
[19:35:30] Jim Galvin leaves the room
[19:36:01] Aaron Falk joins the room
[19:36:20] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> @stpeter: i think part of the possibility of 4 is that Unicode (Asmus, etc.) does the property work and IETF then specifies how to use it.  That's my understandinf of 4.
[19:36:41] <resnick> :)
[19:36:51] Barry Leiba joins the room
[19:37:05] naoki leaves the room
[19:37:36] <Tony Hansen> /John, plus lots of other interesting characters, as in !#%^&*+=|?/
[19:37:39] stpeter ponders
[19:38:20] <John Klensin> @Dave: I think we need to fugre out which properties we need but, after that, yes.   Where 3 and 4 converge is that I don't think we can seriously warn unless we understand enough to define those properties.   Unless our proposed warning is "there are dragons out there and they are fierce"
[19:38:54] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> @John: agree
[19:39:47] <stpeter> ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp as I understand it, "we" would work together with "them" on 4, but the question to me is which individuals would actually do the work (because the energy will need to come from actual humans, not organizations)
[19:39:49] <stpeter> huh
[19:40:40] <stpeter> @John I see your points, yes…
[19:40:48] <Tony Hansen> do we have real contacts at Unicode who are in conversations with folks in IETF ?
[19:41:26] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> Marc should answer but I think he said he found a couple unicode consortium who might be interested if there was agreement to use them and what was needed.  So to Tony: Marc has been trying to encourage that and reached out to many of them.
[19:42:07] <ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp> So the question is whether that's what we want or something else, which I'll ask about (among other things) after Barry-as-John.
[19:42:20] <Shawn Steele> IETF is a member of Unicode
[19:42:36] <Shawn Steele> There are opportunities for people that care to participate in Unicode.
[19:42:57] <John Klensin> @ Tony: ask Andrew.  But, yes, I think we can probably sort tis out , assming only that some of the statements from the Unicode side were in made in good faith.   That said, I still think we need to understand the problem in terms of Unicoce properties to do either 3 or 4, so, if 4 (or 5) doesn't work out, we still have a foundation for 3.
[19:43:10] naoki joins the room
[19:45:14] <Mats Dufberg> hummmmm
[19:45:15] <John Klensin> hummmmm
[19:45:19] <resnick> "hum" by saying yes or no.
[19:45:20] <Shawn Steele> hummmmm
[19:45:21] <Shawn Steele> hummmmm
[19:45:23] <Shawn Steele> hummmmm
[19:45:23] <Shawn Steele> hummmmm
[19:45:24] <Shawn Steele> hummmmm
[19:45:29] <Shawn Steele> hmmmmm not important
[19:45:36] <John Klensin> Yes, there is an important problem  hmmm
[19:45:37] <Shawn Steele> Oops, it did that already
[19:46:00] <hildjj> also give the question number in your yes or no
[19:46:10] <Shawn Steele> I did not intend to hmmm that much
[19:46:19] ajsaf@jabber.org joins the room
[19:46:50] <Shawn Steele> No
[19:46:57] <Shawn Steele> That's not a correct interpretation
[19:47:05] <Barry Leiba> Then tell me
[19:47:09] <resnick> Go ahead and type here and we can update the room.
[19:47:19] <Shawn Steele> hmmm
[19:47:20] <Mats Dufberg> maybe
[19:47:45] <Shawn Steele> THIS problem is not important (these characters in the example/class of characters)
[19:47:56] <Barry Leiba> Jabber folks: please do not type "hmm".  Please type what you're opining.  The time lag can be a problem
[19:48:02] naoki leaves the room
[19:48:02] <Shawn Steele> Homographs in general are a completely different problem, that is interesting in some places
[19:48:06] naoki joins the room
[19:48:22] ajsaf@jabber.org leaves the room
[19:48:23] <John Klensin> (2) Yes, I think there are multiple problems.  The scope/list in draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70 is broader than that in draft-sullivan-lucid... and neither  does what IDNA thinks of a homographs.
[19:48:31] <stpeter> I think there is a problem but I am not yet sure about its extent or importance (in practice) … sorry, I'm processing/thinking slowly here
[19:48:35] ajsaf@jabber.org joins the room
[19:48:36] ajsaf@jabber.org leaves the room
[19:48:54] ajsaf@jabber.org joins the room
[19:49:38] <Shawn Steele> We should probably work with Unicode
[19:49:46] <Barry Leiba> Shawn, I think that really *is* how I described your issue, with the iceberg analogy.
[19:49:52] <Shawn Steele> I think IETF shouldn't make character decisions by ourselves.
[19:50:09] <hildjj> i'm not convinced we know what to ask for from the UTC
[19:50:18] <John Klensin> Mci: I want to strongly advocate 5 -- the reasons are in the I-D.
[19:50:19] <Shawn Steele> The iceberg is homographs, but it isn't *this* problem.
[19:50:54] <Barry Leiba> This problem is a small piece of the iceberg — a few kinds of homographs.
[19:51:03] <John Klensin> @Hildjj: I think we need to figure out the problem in terms of properties, mostly by ourselves, and then go to UTC
[19:51:18] <Shawn Steele> 3 or 6.  NFI is totally evil, a nightmare for implementers and maintainers (we failed at that already in IDNA2003)
[19:52:41] <hildjj> ok, i remember reading that draft now
[19:53:12] <John Klensin> @Shwan:  Again, NFI is an implementation consideration that is important because of the IETF/ W3C (and maybe UTC) disagreement about when normalization is applied.  See the difference between IDNA2008/PRECIS and the evolving versions of Charmod-Norm.
[19:53:52] <John Klensin> @Jeff: thanks.
[19:54:55] <netwerkeddude> @john you're welcome
[19:55:39] <John Klensin> Yes, "NFI" was intended to be identifier-specific
[19:55:51] <stpeter> "all times UTC"
[19:56:31] <John Klensin> At least as far as I can tell so far, it would be hard to bo better than NFC (or NFD) for running text with language identification (or even good language  guesses)
[19:57:59] <Barry Leiba> Please say what you think, not "hmmmm"...
[19:58:25] <Barry Leiba> Yes or no…
[19:58:31] <resnick> Do we prefer 4 & 5?
[19:58:37] <Mats Dufberg> yes
[19:58:38] <resnick> s/&/or
[19:58:56] <stpeter> Yes, 4/5 is best if we can get it
[19:59:01] <John Klensin> I think the 4-5 bundle is the right way to go... and, inclidentlaly, that getting a good start on it is prerequisite to 3
[19:59:45] <Shawn Steele> 3/6 is more realistic
[20:00:01] <Shawn Steele> We did 4/5 in 2003, and it failed.
[20:00:39] <Barry Leiba> Agai, yes or no
[20:00:43] <Mats Dufberg> yes
[20:01:05] Aaron Falk leaves the room
[20:01:39] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[20:01:46] ajsaf@jabber.org leaves the room
[20:02:17] kaorumaeda leaves the room
[20:02:22] <Mats Dufberg> I want to participate.
[20:02:22] <John Klensin> @Shawn: we didn't do 4/5 in 2003 -- we built tables based on NFKC and recommendations from some Unicode figures and _that_ failed.  Similarly, IDNA2008 didn't add any properties or consider IDNA (or IETF-specific) ones, because we thought NFC would do  the job.
[20:02:36] <John Klensin> ((Waving hand, since I have no choice))
[20:02:40] kaorumaeda joins the room
[20:02:50] <kaorumaeda> Please add Yutaka Owia and Takahiro Nemoto
[20:02:59] Yoshiro Yoneya leaves the room
[20:03:02] Tony Hansen leaves the room
[20:03:17] Franck Martin leaves the room
[20:03:23] Suzanne leaves the room
[20:03:32] kaorumaeda leaves the room
[20:03:44] Mats Dufberg leaves the room
[20:04:05] John Klensin leaves the room
[20:04:17] Shawn Steele leaves the room
[20:04:29] stpeter leaves the room
[20:05:00] resnick leaves the room
[20:05:02] Francisco Arias leaves the room
[20:05:51] Kim Davies leaves the room
[20:06:44] Meetecho leaves the room
[20:06:49] naoki leaves the room
[20:07:19] John Levine leaves the room
[20:09:23] hildjj leaves the room
[20:11:28] Aaron Falk joins the room
[20:12:46] Aaron Falk leaves the room
[20:15:45] kaorumaeda joins the room
[20:16:23] ɹəlɐɥʇ əʌɐp leaves the room
[20:18:00] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[20:20:42] naoki joins the room
[20:21:05] Aaron Falk joins the room
[20:22:30] John Levine joins the room
[20:22:36] John Levine leaves the room
[20:23:50] Aaron Falk leaves the room
[20:23:54] hildjj joins the room
[20:25:23] hildjj leaves the room
[20:25:30] hildjj joins the room
[20:26:19] Tony Hansen joins the room
[20:27:10] kaorumaeda leaves the room
[20:27:37] netwerkeddude leaves the room
[20:28:44] ajsaf@jabber.org joins the room
[20:28:55] ajsaf@jabber.org leaves the room
[20:31:03] Suzanne joins the room
[20:34:12] Suzanne leaves the room
[20:38:20] naoki leaves the room
[21:08:21] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[21:09:52] Tony Hansen leaves the room
[21:28:23] Simon Romano leaves the room
[21:31:23] hildjj leaves the room
[21:35:32] Jim Galvin joins the room
[21:43:21] Jim Galvin leaves the room
[21:54:11] Tony Hansen joins the room
[22:05:02] Tony Hansen leaves the room
[22:27:03] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[22:28:11] marc.blanchet.qc leaves the room
[22:28:14] marc.blanchet.qc joins the room
[23:16:25] Simon Romano joins the room
Powered by ejabberd Powered by Erlang Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!