Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "tsenglm@計網中心.中大.tw" <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw>
 >        In HongKong , Taiwan,  user use BIG5 code . This code set has no
> simpified chinese scripts. In China , GB code set has no traditional chinese
> scripts . So there are no mixed type of  GB and BIG5 .  But you know
> VeriSign/NSI  announced ML.com  with any UNICODE can be mixed.
> That is the key problems.
>        Any suggestions must be considered  what to do for .COM in this WG.
> If english character is treated as case folding, Why  CJK can not treated as
> the same way to reduce the number of registrations for trade mark
> considerations?  Case folding is also not a protocol issue .  It is
> othogonal to IDNA too.
>
> L. M. Tseng,

Tseng, which solution do you support ?

 1. Registration/Dispute Resolution Policy that assures:

     The first registrant of a SC or TC .com domain should take
     all of its SC/TC equivalent alternatives.

 2. The new version of Unicode Standard   defines
     additional case-mapping rules  for SC/TC equivalences and
     NAMEPREP  refers to that standard document  for doing SC/TC case folding.

Soobok Lee