I’m not arguing about this, just would like to understand what is being proposed since, as far as I understand, so far, the scope has been the three issues I mentioned below. What would be the new scope of Universal Acceptance that is being proposed?

-- 
Francisco.


On 2/19/15, 11:40 AM, "Mark Svancarek" <marksv@microsoft.com> wrote:

It seems like it should be UA; we will need to add another requirement list for user input controls (can enter, renders, RTL, storage, APIs).

 

 

 

From: Ram Mohan [mailto:rmohan@afilias.info]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:23 AM
To: Francisco Arias; M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org
Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable

 

I’d consider this still in the UA area – since non-ASCII characters are not being accepted “natively”

 

 

From: Francisco Arias [mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM
To: M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable

 

Thanks for reporting this Mark, I’ll pass this report internally.

 

Now, this is not UA related since there is no new TLD, IDNs, or EAI involved, correct?

 

-- 

Francisco.

 

 

On 2/19/15, 10:26 AM, "M3 Sweatt" <msweatt@microsoft.com> wrote:

 

I expect to see similar results when others attempt such updates. ;)

Perhaps this limitation can be addressed?

Sent from my Windows Phone. Replies may be brief and may have spelling errors.

From: Mark Svancarek
Sent: ‎2/‎19/‎2015 8:16 AM
To: UA-discuss@icann.org
Subject: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable

I tried to update my ICANN profile page today: