Proposal to move forward on $f/$l issues

Editors-

    I've been doing some talking/research with folks about the particular 
problems Japanese users have with Unicode. I understand the need for specifying 
font and language, but I'm concerned about *us* proposing the solution. I'm 
concerned that we are tackling a problem that the majority of us are not 
prepared to solve (both from a political and a technical point of view), 
and that it may significantly delay the specification's 
adoption.  

 

    Therefore I propose the following solution, which essentially defers the 
details of the $f and $l cross references until a later 
time:

 

1) We define the $f 
and $l namespaces as "reserved" for use in i18n characters. The use  shall 
be defined in a future version of the XRI spec, or at least in a separate 
document. 

 

2) We *not* say 
anything special about the comparison of two strings containing $f or $l cross 
references. The issue about whether $f and $l are significant for the purposes 
of comparison can be determined later, but for now, absent a clear consensus, 
I'd suggest we stay silent. 

 

    I 
do not think this "prejudices" against the use of $f and $l - in fact this 
proposal explicitly calls out these namespaces for future definition. I'm just 
worried that we are getting bogged down in this issue now. If we condition 
approval of the XRI specification on the inclusion of the 
fully-specified $f and $l, I believe we'll have a longer road to approval. 

 

    Nat, as the champion of this issue, and the main proponent of the 
solution, I expect your input to be the most important on whether this plan is 
acceptable. If this deferral is a showstopper, please let us 
know.

 

    -Gabe