[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Internationalized PTR draft submitted
Hi, I am Hongbo Shi, one of the authors. James Seng is a person who has
given us many comments. :)
Now let me explain our IPTR draft.
At first, I think internationalized domain name also means how to have
multiples names for a single machine/IP in different languages.
Such as www."iDN-in-JP".waseda."iDN-in-JP".jp.
Due to the thinking, I suggest a new RR TYPE to provide address-to-iDN,
exactly I should say address-to-iDNs.
^^
Second, about "language tag"
I also think whether it is necessary or not. But my reason is different
from yours. :)
If we talk about "language" on DNS, we will encounter a problem that the
language is per domain name? per label? within label? In our draft there
are some open issues. The problem I raised before is one of them.
Every comment is welcome.
Best Regards.
Hongbo Shi
From: James Seng <James@Seng.cc>
Subject: Re: [idn] Internationalized PTR draft submitted
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:38:55 +0800
> Rick,
>
> You asking the wrong person. :-) I am not the author of the I-D altho Hongbo
> Shi keep me in the loop while she is writing the I-D.
>
> I was originally confused about her approach too until she explain to me that
> it is possible you want to have multiples names for a single machine/IP but in
> different languages.
>
> It is like saying "okay, I am a Japanese OS and I want the Japanese name of
> this IP if possible, otherwise, I take the next best bet." Her original idea
> was to let the server choose which to return. I suggested that she return
> everything and let the client choose the best they want.
>
> -James Seng
>
> Rick H Wesson wrote:
> >
> > James,
> >
> > Why must we always talk about the origin "language?" If the domain names
> > have been RACE encoded then they were eventually converted to UTF-16 which
> > basicly covers all "languages."
> >
> > My meager understanding of RACE and Unicode 3.0 concludes we SHOULD ban
> > the word "language" from our discussion/drafts and replace it with
> > charset.
> >
> > Since we could have *any* string of UTF-16 encoded chars what point is it
> > to maintain the origional language? Infact if we had the following
> > hostname, which should be legal (U-0F3C U-0726 U-35A6) which "language"
> > would go in the "language" tag? The above are one Tibetan, one CJK and one
> > unknown....
> >
> > Please educate me on the utility of maintaining the description "language"
> > or charset for that matter, once you're in UTF-* you should be able to go
> > to any other charset!
> >
> > -rick
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, James Seng wrote:
> >
> > > example of an IPTR RR:
> > >
> > > 1.2.3.4.IN-ADDR.ARPA. IPTR "language" "name-in-utf8"
> > >
> > > [RFC1766] describes the ISO 639/ISO 3166 conventions. A language name
> > > is always written in lower case, while country codes are written in
> > > upper case. The "language" field in an IPTR RR MUST follow the con-
> > > ventions defined in [RFC1766].
> > >
> > > For Example:
> > >
> > > 4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA. IPTR "zh-cn" "name-in-utf8"
> > > 4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA. IPTR "zh-tw" "name-in-utf8"
> > > 4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA. IPTR "ja-jp" "name-in-utf8"
> > > 4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA. IPTR "ko-kr" "name-in-utf8"
> > >
>
>