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

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw [mailto:tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw]
>Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:11 AM
>To: ben; Adam M. Costello; idn@ops.ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence
>
>
>       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 composing labels of "mixed" Unicode code points is believed to be a key
problem, that's an issue with current draft documents being developed and
discussed in this WG -- which clearly permit this method of composition.  If
such a composition method doesn't make sense in a particular local context,
it likely won't be widely used to create labels in that local context -- but
that doesn't imply that the conventions of the local context should be
applied everywhere else.

This WG shouldn't attempt to produce solutions particular to a specific name
space.  The end result should be applicable to _any_ name space.

<Scott/>