Re: [idn] UTF-8 / RACE

["Sherin Alsoudani" <sherinalsoudani@hotmail.com>]

Dear Patrik,

> > As
> > we wait for applications to display RACE properly, it will set us back
> > for a  long while - that is the crux of the problem I am afraid of.
> >
> > For example, the number one Internet application in the Middle East 
>today
> > is  probably Microsoft Internet Explorer.  It already has support for
> > UTF-8.
>
>You still don't recognize the difference many people on this mailing list
>try to get through to you, which is that IF you use an ACE encoding the
>enduser can himself control whether he is seeing the ACE encoded word or
>not. In the case of UTF-8, he must wait for the system administrator to
>upgrade software in the path of the information and upgrade his own
>software. Because of this argument, introduction of IDN is arguably faster
>with ACE than UTF-8.

Sadly, you and many people on this list are not understanding what I have 
written.  My point has been to be practical: you say that the enduser can 
control whether he is seeing the ACE encoded word or not.  Please show me 
one client that can do this today.

And after you find that one client, explain to me why I should change my 
position regarding IE, given that IE is successfully putting out UTF-8 
characters today, there are providers compatible with this today, and that 
bringing the Internet to people sooner rather than later is important 
*today*.  For the 95% of the Middle East that is not on the Internet, there 
are ongoing efforts by system administrators all over to make it easier to 
come online.  Five minutes of research on the net will educate you about 
this.

I am puzzled by this amount of theory that is passed back on forth on the 
list.  Things ARE moving, and UTF-8 is recognized as a better ultimate 
solution.  If it is more painful, I can appreciate that through the 
education you and others have given me.  Nonetheless, "necessity is the 
mother of invention", and your and others claims that it will be very 
difficult, and very slow...well, I would invite you to look around at the 
different efforts going on to prove that wrong.

>You continue to say that software have already support for UTF-8, while you
>point out the true statement that for arabic you don't differ between
>casing of chararcters. This means that the software somewhere not only use
>UTF-8 encoding, but also that some normalization is done somewhere (or
>should happen somewhere). Because the kind of normalization that happens if
>you want case insensitivity everyone need to agree on what normalization
>scheme to use. That is what we in this group call nameprep.

Actually, you misunderstood: Arabic does not have any case - there is no 
concept of upper/lower case.  But I certainly appreciate the need for what 
you call nameprep; there are other issues that Arabic will need.

Sherin

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com