What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable)
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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM To: M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> Sent: 2/19/2015 8:16 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto: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:
It’s a fair question. Here the failure happens when editing the non-email portion of an online profile. Comparing the page to our existing requirements: · Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS · Can correctly render International strings - WORKS · Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED · Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING · Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED · Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED · Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING · Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED · Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED · Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED · Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED The site fails our criteria, though in a new context (not an email). Does that make sense? From: Francisco Arias [mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:08 PM To: Mark Svancarek; rmohan@afilias.info; M3 Sweatt; UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable) 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM To: M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> Sent: 2/19/2015 8:16 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto: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:
One issue that is UA, in my point of view. Back in Singapore, I was testing registration software. In attach You have pictures of my attempts to print ID tags in IDN. Is this UA issue? And for the record - what is written on ID tags should be clear to everybody, but imagine dual script ID tags - ASCII (clear to everybody) and native script (my real name is not correctly written in ASCII and I want to have my real name on ID tag). If this is UA, then> ·Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - *WORKS* ·Can correctly render International strings - *WORKS* ·Can correctly render RTL strings – /NOT TESTED/ ·Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – _FAILS_ ·Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – /NOT TESTED/ ·Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – /NOT TESTED/ ·Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – *WORKS*__ ·Can send email to recipients with such email address – /NOT TESTED/ ·Can receive email from senders with such email address – /NOT TESTED/ ·Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – /NOT TESTED/ ·Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – /NOT TESTED/ Regards, Dušan On 19.2.2015 23:30, Mark Svancarek wrote:
It’s a fair question. Here the failure happens when editing the non-email portion of an online profile.
Comparing the page to our existing requirements:
·Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - *WORKS*
·Can correctly render International strings - *WORKS*
·Can correctly render RTL strings – /NOT TESTED/
·Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – _FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING_
·Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – /NOT TESTED/
·Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – /NOT TESTED/
·Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – _FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING_
·Can send email to recipients with such email address – /NOT TESTED/
·Can receive email from senders with such email address – /NOT TESTED/
·Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – /NOT TESTED/
·Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – /NOT TESTED/
The site fails our criteria, though in a new context (not an email).
Does that make sense?
*From:* Francisco Arias [mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org] *Sent:* Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:08 PM *To:* Mark Svancarek; rmohan@afilias.info; M3 Sweatt; UA-discuss@icann.org *Subject:* What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable)
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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] *Sent:* Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM *To:* M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> *Sent: *2/19/2015 8:16 AM *To: *UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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:
--- Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom. http://www.avast.com
We should probably break this down into two questions: 1) What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? 2) What is the scope of Universal Acceptance within our scope? Perfectly acceptable for those two to be different. For instance, we could limit our efforts to domain name related stuff and yet all agree that’s not all there is. Christian Dawson Chairman & Co-founder Internet Infrastructure Coalition (i2C) c: 703 623 2612 http://i2coalition.com <http://i2coalition.com/> PGP: 26F8DBD8 Fingerprint: 35A1 12C9 8CBC 8F72 3706 52EA 23F2 CA0C 26F8 DBD8
On Feb 20, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Dusan Stojicevic <dusan@dukes.in.rs> wrote:
One issue that is UA, in my point of view. Back in Singapore, I was testing registration software. In attach You have pictures of my attempts to print ID tags in IDN. Is this UA issue? And for the record - what is written on ID tags should be clear to everybody, but imagine dual script ID tags - ASCII (clear to everybody) and native script (my real name is not correctly written in ASCII and I want to have my real name on ID tag).
If this is UA, then> · Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS · Can correctly render International strings - WORKS · Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED · Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS · Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED · Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED · Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – WORKS · Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED · Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED · Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED · Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED
Regards, Dušan
On 19.2.2015 23:30, Mark Svancarek wrote:
It’s a fair question. Here the failure happens when editing the non-email portion of an online profile.
Comparing the page to our existing requirements:
· Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS · Can correctly render International strings - WORKS · Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED · Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING · Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED · Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED · Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING · Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED · Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED · Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED · Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED
The site fails our criteria, though in a new context (not an email).
Does that make sense? <> From: Francisco Arias [mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org <mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:08 PM To: Mark Svancarek; rmohan@afilias.info <mailto:rmohan@afilias.info>; M3 Sweatt; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable)
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 <mailto: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 <mailto:rmohan@afilias.info>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:23 AM To: Francisco Arias; M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM To: M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> Sent: 2/19/2015 8:16 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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:
<http://www.avast.com/> Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/> <B9XtcsdCAAAp1Z_.jpg><B9XwMY5CIAAyKE7.jpg>
I think this is a good approach. I think it’s OK if we focus #2 mainly on gTLD/IDN/IRI/EAI for our steering group… does anyone object? It doesn’t stop us from being evangelists for whatever larger scope may exist in #1 (such as Francisco’s existing effort to update the ICANN profile page). From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Christian Dawson Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 4:49 AM To: Dusan Stojicevic Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable) We should probably break this down into two questions: 1) What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? 2) What is the scope of Universal Acceptance within our scope? Perfectly acceptable for those two to be different. For instance, we could limit our efforts to domain name related stuff and yet all agree that’s not all there is. Christian Dawson Chairman & Co-founder Internet Infrastructure Coalition (i2C) c: 703 623 2612 http://i2coalition.com<http://i2coalition.com/> PGP: 26F8DBD8 Fingerprint: 35A1 12C9 8CBC 8F72 3706 52EA 23F2 CA0C 26F8 DBD8 On Feb 20, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Dusan Stojicevic <dusan@dukes.in.rs<mailto:dusan@dukes.in.rs>> wrote: One issue that is UA, in my point of view. Back in Singapore, I was testing registration software. In attach You have pictures of my attempts to print ID tags in IDN. Is this UA issue? And for the record - what is written on ID tags should be clear to everybody, but imagine dual script ID tags - ASCII (clear to everybody) and native script (my real name is not correctly written in ASCII and I want to have my real name on ID tag). If this is UA, then> • Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS • Can correctly render International strings - WORKS • Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED • Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS • Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED • Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED • Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – WORKS • Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED • Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED • Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED • Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED Regards, Dušan On 19.2.2015 23:30, Mark Svancarek wrote: It’s a fair question. Here the failure happens when editing the non-email portion of an online profile. Comparing the page to our existing requirements: • Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS • Can correctly render International strings - WORKS • Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED • Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING • Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED • Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED • Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING • Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED • Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED • Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED • Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED The site fails our criteria, though in a new context (not an email). Does that make sense? From: Francisco Arias [mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:08 PM To: Mark Svancarek; rmohan@afilias.info<mailto:rmohan@afilias.info>; M3 Sweatt; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable) 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM To: M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> Sent: 2/19/2015 8:16 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto: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: ________________________________ [http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png]<http://www.avast.com/> Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom. www.avast.com<http://www.avast.com/> <B9XtcsdCAAAp1Z_.jpg><B9XwMY5CIAAyKE7.jpg>
Let's put this another way: we strive to find all TLD*/IDN/IRI/EAI issues and continuously make them vanish or less impactful, but if/when we stumble upon non-TLD/IDN/IRI/EAI UA issues, we take note of that and try dealing with it on a less prioritized way. Rubens Footnote: *we don't have to pick g's or ccTLD's, and IDN ccTLDs are as affected by UA as IDN gTLDs
Em 20/02/2015, à(s) 16:22:000, Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com> escreveu:
I think this is a good approach. I think it’s OK if we focus #2 mainly on gTLD/IDN/IRI/EAI for our steering group… does anyone object?
It doesn’t stop us from being evangelists for whatever larger scope may exist in #1 (such as Francisco’s existing effort to update the ICANN profile page). <> From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Christian Dawson Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 4:49 AM To: Dusan Stojicevic Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable)
We should probably break this down into two questions:
1) What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? 2) What is the scope of Universal Acceptance within our scope?
Perfectly acceptable for those two to be different. For instance, we could limit our efforts to domain name related stuff and yet all agree that’s not all there is.
Christian Dawson Chairman & Co-founder Internet Infrastructure Coalition (i2C) c: 703 623 2612 http://i2coalition.com <http://i2coalition.com/>
PGP: 26F8DBD8 Fingerprint: 35A1 12C9 8CBC 8F72 3706 52EA 23F2 CA0C 26F8 DBD8
On Feb 20, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Dusan Stojicevic <dusan@dukes.in.rs <mailto:dusan@dukes.in.rs>> wrote:
One issue that is UA, in my point of view. Back in Singapore, I was testing registration software. In attach You have pictures of my attempts to print ID tags in IDN. Is this UA issue? And for the record - what is written on ID tags should be clear to everybody, but imagine dual script ID tags - ASCII (clear to everybody) and native script (my real name is not correctly written in ASCII and I want to have my real name on ID tag).
If this is UA, then> · Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS · Can correctly render International strings - WORKS · Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED · Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS · Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED · Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED · Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – WORKS · Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED · Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED · Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED · Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED
Regards, Dušan
On 19.2.2015 23:30, Mark Svancarek wrote: It’s a fair question. Here the failure happens when editing the non-email portion of an online profile.
Comparing the page to our existing requirements:
· Allows entry of international chars into UI input controls - WORKS · Can correctly render International strings - WORKS · Can correctly render RTL strings – NOT TESTED · Can communicate data between apps and services in formats which support Unicode and are convertible to/from UTF-8 – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING · Offers public APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 – NOT TESTED · Offers private APIs which support Unicode & UTF-8 (these private APIs apply only to inter-service calls by the same vendor) – NOT TESTED · Stores user data values as a type which allows Unicode and is convertible to/from UTF-8 (visible only to the product/service owner) – FAILS - REJECTS THE STRING · Can send email to recipients with such email address – NOT TESTED · Can receive email from senders with such email address – NOT TESTED · Supports accounts associated with both an ASCII and Unicode email address – NOT TESTED · Supports all domain name strings in the Public Suffix List regardless of length – NOT TESTED
The site fails our criteria, though in a new context (not an email).
Does that make sense?
From: Francisco Arias [mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org <mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:08 PM To: Mark Svancarek; rmohan@afilias.info <mailto:rmohan@afilias.info>; M3 Sweatt; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: What is the scope of Universal Acceptance? (was Re: [UA-discuss] this would be amusing if it wasn't so predictable)
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 <mailto: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 <mailto:rmohan@afilias.info>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:23 AM To: Francisco Arias; M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:17 PM To: M3 Sweatt; Mark Svancarek; UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> Sent: 2/19/2015 8:16 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto: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:
<http://www.avast.com/> Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
<B9XtcsdCAAAp1Z_.jpg><B9XwMY5CIAAyKE7.jpg>
participants (5)
-
Christian Dawson -
Dusan Stojicevic -
Francisco Arias -
Mark Svancarek -
Rubens Kuhl