traditional/simplified (Re: [idn] wg milestones update)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>]

At 10:25 29.04.2001 +0800, Sun Guonian wrote:
>[30] Within a single zone, the zone manager MUST be able to define
>equivalence rules that suit the purpose of the zone, such as, but not
>limited to, and not necessarily, non-ASCII case folding, Unicode
>normalizations (if Unicode is chosen), Cyrillic/Greek/Latin folding, or
>traditional/simplified Chinese equivalence. Such defined equivalences
>MUST NOT remove equivalences that are assumed by (old or
>local-rule-ignorant) caches.
>...
>==============================
>I think the traditional/simplified Chinese equivalence SHOULD be defined
>as a single rule anywhere so that we can make user use IDN, or chinese
>part in IDN, without confusion.

If it was possible to write down this equivalence rule on a single sheet of 
paper (without the codepoints), I would agree.
Unfortunately not even the definitions of the different classes of 
traditional/simplified Chinese equivalence seems to fit on a single sheet 
of paper (the 1-n, n-1 and contextual mappings in particular).

A complex specification is prone to implementation errors, especially when 
there are large markets (US, Western Europe) where a sloppy implementation 
will not be challenged by real-life usage of the functionality.