Re: [bug-libunistring] Fwd: Disagreement between libidn2 and Python idna

[Tim Rühsen]

Hi Bruno,

On 10.11.20 03:07, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Tim Rühsen wrote:
> >   From what I can see in the libunistring sources, it is based on Unicode
> > 9.0.0
>
> Correct.
>
> > while 0x7fd has been introduced with Unicode 11.0 [2].
>
> Yes, apparently so, when you look at http://www.unicode.org/charts/ .
>
> > So something here might be out of sync.
>
> Yes, it is inevitable that different software supports different
> versions of Unicode. Unicode is an evolving standard.
>
> > if there are any plans to upgrade to Unicode 11.0.
>
> To me, adding a sensible API for meta-information on Emojis
> has higher priority than just updating the table to Unicode 10, 11, 12.
> The latter is useful only for a very small number of use-cases.

You are right - when one assumes the registrars don't support/allow new 
code points introduced with Unicode 10 or higher, updating Unicode is 
not relevant (at least for libidn2, which is the context). I actually 
have no idea if that assumption about registrars and code points is true 
or not.

Just in case someone finds time to update libunistring... where to begin 
? Is gnulib the start point !?

Regards, Tim

OpenPGP_0x08302DB6A2670428.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature