Re: IDN eamples for testing
"Edmon Chung" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.idn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
ok. So the right way to do it is a clean break with no transition is what we are saying. That is good. Edmon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Ewell" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Cc: "Edmon Chung" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [idn] IDN eamples for testing > Edmon Chung <edmon at neteka dot com> wrote: > > > This is actually an interesting question. Since we know that there are > > actually quite a bunch of clients out there that uses bq--RACE, do we > > think that those testbeds (such as in the case of JPRS) should keep > > bq--RACE in the zone (together with xn--punycode) for a while for > > transitional purposes? Or must this be considered non-conformant to > > the standards? > > I would think the answers would be unequivocally No, the RACE mechanism > should not be retained, and Yes, it would be non-conformant. > > Testbeds are testbeds, intended as temporary feasibility studies to > determine if a new standard or technology will fly in the real world. > Once the "real" standard has been approved, the testbed becomes obsolete > (to the extent it differs from the approved version) and any code or > data created in support of the testbed needs to be updated or removed. > > Creating de-facto standards by promoting the use of testbeds beyond > their intended use subverts the standardization process. > > -Doug Ewell > Fullerton, California > http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ > >