Fwd: RFC 8369 on Internationalizing IPv6 Using 128-Bit Unicode

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

No, This RFC does not require any correction, the "errors" are part of the
April joke itself ! But we can suggest enhancements to the joke.
Well this RFC is still very Latin-centric. I would have loved the
introduction of "ωmojis" and "αmojis" (Greek mojis), "яmojis" (yeah!),
"юmojis" (not from me, meant only for "you"!), and "あmojis" (let's respect
the origins of what we call "emojis", this kind of "mojis" would be used
for character with authentic origin we can trace to its real author!)


2018-04-03 7:43 GMT+02:00 Martin J. Dürst via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org>:

> On 2018/04/03 10:56, Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode wrote:
>
>> Whew!  Thanks for explaining the joke! Everyone here really thought they
>> were serious.  Maybe you should write to the authors of the RFC and explain
>> to them that their growth-function is incorrect.  I'm sure they'd be glad
>> of the correction.
>>
>
> I'm sure they know they exaggerated quite a bit. I'm also sure they trust
> the Unicode Consortium to know when they would have to enlarge the code
> space, if every.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180403/47a15e46/attachment.html>