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

["xiaodong lee" <lee@whale.cnnic.net.cn>]

Hello James
I think we made some misunderstanding on the difference between language and scripts.
I do have no interest to handle language problem in DNS, it is not a good idea as you know. :))
I mean that some problem like TSconv is a language problem originally in some sense. but it 
is not only a language problem finally.  
Right is you basic logic, so I suggest to handle such problem differently too. we need to adopt 
a properly ways to divide the problem into different part, and handle them in different method.
I agree with you, we should try to find a effective solution. we need try, including me.  :-))
ok!
Xiaodong Lee


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>
To: "Xiaodong LEE" <Xiaodong.Lee@cnnic.net.cn>; <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw>
Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence


> Hi Xiangdong,
> 
> Now, responsing directly to your note:
> 
> First, I hope we can agree that the wg is well aware of the TC/SC
> problem (after such a long discussion thread) and we are all actively
> seeking a solution to it. We may disagree with the approach but we are
> certainly not disagreeing with the principle.
> 
> > you said it. Maybe we could not handle language problems in IDN, but
> we could
> > not forget that all script have language characteristics of
> themselves, especially for
> > Chinese. Internationalization means all users could use their familiar
> ways to use
> > domain name, not means all users must follow one ways.
> 
> Lets use logic to discuss this: A. domain names B. scripts C. languages
> 
> Your reasoning:
> domain names handle script. A->B
> script are used by languages. B->C
> Therefore, domain names handle language. A->C
> 
> basic logic tells us that the last statement is not always true. And in
> this case, domain names is not able to handle language. This is a known
> limitation of domain names.
> 
> > Exactly, we are doing internationalization, but how do we explain for
> > users what is internationalization, and what is multilingualism, I
> > think ordinary users care about how to use , not what is.
> 
> Agree. Very few people recongized the differences.
> 
> While there is an desire to solve 100% of the users problem today, all
> developments started with one small step at a time. Without solving the
> first 10%, we wont know what the next 10% problem. This wg is not the
> first nor will be the last one to solve the whole I18N problem. It is
> one of the puzzle piece for the IETF and there are many other puzzle to
> solve in future. So lets not put too much task upon ourselves.
> 
> > > 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.
> 
> And so am I. This is why I can understand Prof Tseng's well-intention.
> 
> But the "users set" in IETF context are not limited to any particular
> locale so the opinion to the solution may be slightly different due to
> different perspective.
> 
> Anyhow, lets not argue further on these details anymore but lets focus
> on doing the job. The tsconv draft requires more work so lets put more
> effort into that to make sure it is completed.
> 
> *cheers*
> 
> -James Seng
> 
>