Talk:IDNAbis

From IDNwiki

Add issues below as you see fit, sign with ~~~~.

[edit] Proposed deletion

We appreciate the effort that has gone into the preparation of this article, but it is outside the scope of the IDNwiki. Its sole purpose is to provide a venue for the evaluation of the localized .test domains. Tracking the IDNAbis effort is more properly the concern of the IETF and its working group. The first-named author of IDNA2003 maintains a Web page that is dynamically linked to the IETF's own authoritative document repository. To avoid any risk of the role of the IDNwiki being misunderstood, we have placed a link to the external resource in the article on Technical topics and will be removing the local article unless the discussion that the present remark may trigger reveals compelling reason for retaining it. WikiSysop 08:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Just because google:IDNAbis shows Patrick's page as first hit does not mean that it is authoritative and/or covers exactly the same topic as IDNAbis. E.g., it does not cover EAI and IRIs, two relevant topics for the IDN test mentioned on various pages here. It also does not cover the 2606bis draft about the IDN test TLDs, or John's RFC 1123 toplabel erratum, i.e. the whole shaky ground the IDN test TLDs are built on at the moment. Clicking on any of the linked drafts or RFCs will always show the latest version with links to prior versions, errata, etc., that is as authoritative as it can get. That you link to an external raw list of a few drafts explaining nothing about IDNAbis is your business, IMO the IDNAbis page is a better overview, and the IDNAbis WG page would be more authoritative, if that's your concern. The IDNAbis WG wiki is at the moment unused apart from a link to the IDNAbis page here. We could certainly discuss with Harald, John, Tina, Vint, and others to find a new place for this page, but I don't see the point. --Frank 09:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

The point is that the IDNwiki was never intended to be a forum for discussing the protocol revision. Nor has been there been any use of it in that regard, whatsoever, the present article notwithstanding. There has been no commentary about the proposed removal of this article by anyone other than its sole editor, and it is being deleted herewith --WikiSysop 09:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)