Re: Please discuss the proposed text, not "belief in Unicode"

> > > The comment that "this is unacceptable" is merely repeating
> > > an opinion. Of course many things are unacceptable to
> > > some and not to others. I don't think we need to pay any
> > > attention to opinions without justification.
> > 
> > You gave no justification on your proposal.
> > 
> >                                                 Masataka Ohta
> 
> The proposals contained their own justification:

It doesn't. It doesn't give any justification of why "Avoiding Variants"
is necessary (it isn't) nor how it is related to URL (it isn't).

Instead, my counter proposal contains the justificaiton.

> For "Use of Character Encodings", the justification is:
> 
> "care should be taken not to introduce unnecessary variety in the 
> ways in which characters are encoded into octets and then into 
> URL characters"

As written in my proposal, what is represented in URL is already
encoded characters, not a raw character. Thus, ther is no variety
from the beginnin.

> For "Avoiding Variants", the justification is:

There is no variants.

> If you wish to object, please be clear about whether your 
> objection is:
>    - the requirement is not important
>    - the proposal doesn't satisfy the requirement
>    - you have a proposal which satisfies the same
>      requirement better.

There is no requirement and, naturally, you gave no justification
of your requirement.

							Masataka Ohta