[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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



One note:

The WG is chartered in a narrow manner to solve a particular problem.
And if we were to expand it to solve a larger-set of problem, we could
but it would mean we would probably have to restart almost all over
again.

I was also reminded once in a while by some folk in IETF that this WG
should be prepare to declare "no-solution" because it does not meet the
"user requirements" (that is vaguely defined unfortunately). But I
remind optimistic that we can find a solution to an "internationalized
domain names" problem with the limited scope we have.

However, should we want to start discussing on "multilingual naming"
problem, then either (a) it is out of scope for this wg or (b) this wg
should declare "there is no solution in domain names space" and lets not
waste time in this wg.

While I am incline to (a) (altho I have not hear any formal complain
that multilingual naming is out-of-scope), (b) is an option I am prepare
to take if this is the consensus of the wg.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "xiaodong lee" <lee@whale.cnnic.net.cn>
To: "James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>; <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw>;
<liana.ydisg@juno.com>
Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>; <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence


> > Thus, I would modify your statement below to: "from each SCRIPT
> > users/engineers and ask them how they want their scripts to be use".
> > (ie. all han ideograph (CJK) users should talk about han folding
> > together if we going down the path of tsconv).
> >
> Prof. Tseng care more about users requirements, I think, a technology
developed without
> enough users requirements, it makes no sense.