Re: [idn] Cherokee letters look like uppercase Latin letters

["Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

The initial ascii domain idea  was not a mistake, but a
practical choice  in so early stage of the internet when  
we had no standard for UNICODE-like universal character set .

Uppercase Latin 'A' is case-folded into latin 'a'.
Cyrillic 'A' is also case-folded into cyrillic 'a'.
(latin 'a' and cyrillic 'a' still look the same.)

But Cherokee 'A' has no lowercase letter for it.

Prefix-based Versioning on ACE may help to ease this situation around
Cherokee and new scripts blocks to be added to UCS
in the future. 

For future script additions to UCS ,we have no nameprep rules now.
As long as we should enforce current NAMEPREP rules, we are also prohibiting
future script additions from being used in IDN that will have to be nameprepped
by the future versions of ACE and NAMEPREP rules.

http://www.unicode.org/unicode/alloc/Pipeline.html will help to guess
the agenda for future ACE and NAMEPREP versioning.

Regards, Soobok Lee

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yves Arrouye" <yves@realnames.com>
To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:25 PM
Subject: RE: [idn] Cherokee letters look like uppercase Latin letters


> 
> > Do we need to allow Cherokee letters in IDN?
> 
> It would be quite bad to deny access to IDN to one population, yes! After
> all, we're internationalizing DNS because some populations have been left
> over initially and we want to fix that.
> 
> I find very interesting (and ironic) to see these suggestions about
> removing characters whose glyphs may confuse some people. It is a similar
> reasoning that led to the choice of the initial set of characters allowed
> in DNS labels, and I am sure that in the world of then, complex scripts or
> even exotic scripts would have been dismissed for fear of confusion for the
> typical user. Are you really seriously suggesting to do the same mistake
> again, but with different populations?!
> 
> YA
>