Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

New section about IDNs #128

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: gh-pages
Choose a base branch
from
Open

New section about IDNs #128

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

xfq
Copy link
Member

@xfq xfq commented Mar 8, 2024

Fix #119.

This is a new section about IDNs, without much content. Any comments would be appreciated.


Preview | Diff

Copy link

netlify bot commented Mar 8, 2024

Deploy Preview for bp-i18n-specdev ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 5a284d2
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/bp-i18n-specdev/deploys/672ce4663ccf140008111a5e
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-128--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@xfq xfq requested review from aphillips and r12a April 12, 2024 05:15
@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Apr 24, 2024

This seems like the wrong advice. For specifications dealing directly with domains we'd want them to reuse https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#host-parsing. At some point that ends up using IDNA2008 by way of UTS46, but with a lot of caveats.

@aphillips
Copy link
Contributor

@xfq Our BPs should reflect @annevk's comment. Can you suggest text before next week's telecon (2024-10-31) or do you need more time?

@xfq
Copy link
Member Author

xfq commented Nov 7, 2024

Sorry, I just saw this. We can change the text to something like this:

Specifications dealing with domains directly should refer to the IDNA algorithms in [[URL]], instead of IDNA2008 (from [[RFC5890]] to [[RFC5893]]) or IDNA2003 (from [[RFC3940]] to [[RFC3942]].

What is the reason for not using IDNA2008 directly? Is the rationale recorded somewhere?

@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Nov 7, 2024

IDNA2008 is not what's actually implemented. UTS46 has quite a bit to say about it, which is referenced from URL.

index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Addison Phillips <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Best practice related to IDNs
4 participants