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

[=?utf-8?B?dHNlbmdsbUDoqIjntrLkuK3lv4Mu5Lit5aSnLnR3?= <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw>]

Hi James,
             I  think you can display these chinese characters in your
system, so you can make
the explaination , and  tell me the answer how to treat them ?
TC(統) , SC(统)
TC(頻),  SC(频)

They are  the same chinese characters in pairs but they are coded with
different  UNICODE .
Does they are like the problems of   " fi " ?
And  tell me  why  ａ　Ａ　should  be mapped to ASCII  "a" or "A" ?

I don't expect  this WG to solve all the equivalence of TC/SC. I just want
to know what is the guideline to reduce the confusing troubles in nameprep ?
Why so amall set of  PRC simplified quick-written scripts are not case
folding problem ?

L.M.Tseng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenny Huang" <huangk@alum.sinica.edu>
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 3:17 PM
Subject: RE: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence


> Hi James,
>
> "A script is a written form of a language". Again, we may want to question
:
> "What is the goal of this WG" or "What is the need of non-English speaker"
?
> Are you proposing we should setup a MDN WG to replace things have
> done so far ?
>
>
> Kenny Huang
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-idn@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-idn@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of
James Seng/Personal
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:57 PM
> To: tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw; liana.ydisg@juno.com
> Cc: idn@ops.ietf.org; dhc@dcrocker.net
> Subject: Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence
>
>
> As much as I agree with Prof Tseng well-intention, unfortunately, the
> concept of "language" is out of scope for the working group.
>
> This working is chartered to do "Internationalized access to Domain
> Names". Unfortunately, domain names understand only "script" not
> "language". It does not matter what you wish, it can't be done in Domain
> Names (It can be done in some other mechanism of course).
>
> And we are doing "Internationalization" not "Multilingualism". These may
> just be terminology but the subtle differences in these terms makes a
> lot of differences. I learn it the hard way for those who is with the WG
> from the beginning.
>
> 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).
>
> -James Seng
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <liana.ydisg@juno.com>
> To: <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw>
> Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>; <dhc@dcrocker.net>
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence
>
>
> > I agree with Prof. Tseng's point.  And I suggest that
> > we shall collect inputs from each language users/engineers
> >  and ask them what do they think about their scripts should
> > be handled.  What are the non-semantic issues that
> > could be dealed with [nameprep] type of simple scheme and
> > benifit long term communication and identification of
> > a hostname on the internet.
> >
> > Liana
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:14:37 +0800
> > =?UTF-8?B?dHNlbmdsbUDoqIjntrLkuK3lv4Mu5Lit5aSnLnR3?=
> > <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw> writes:
> >        If your statements are meant John is the God father , so no
> > > one can
> > > pass over the line he defined , I will ask what is the goal of this
> > > WG ?
> > > Does it is used to hurt other people in this world ?
> > >       IDN is very complex ,  but if  you try to neglect some truth
> > > then the
> > > political issue will be introduced , then no one will be happy .
> > >
> > > L.M.Tseng
> > >
> >
>
>