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

["James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>]

Dear Prof Tseng,

>                     An Engineer will do right thing and try best not
to do
> something hurt others. No matter it is client solution or server based
> solution , and what level domain that will be applied, the most basic
issuse
> is to reduce easy-to-confuse term .  You know the frequently used
characters
> are almost the same in Taiwan and China, most of them are different
code
> point in UNICODE and many of them are very similar especially in some
small
> difference in radical.  The most bad thing is people do not know the
> confusing is existed in high probability.

Yes, I am very aware of the difficulties Chinese have between TC & SC. I
have no given up hope on it yet of course and still would like to see a
solution. But I am quite convience a solution in the Unicode
Normalization space is not possible because TC-SC is not a simple
codepoint normalization thing. It is far more complex involving
lexemical, orthographical and contextual conversion.

I also understand one of the arguments about doing partial TC-SC. Yes,
it is true that some TC-SC can be done using codepoint normalization.
And we could further reduce that set to avoid conflict with Korean and
Japanese. I have not done enough research in this aspect to give you my
view on this yet.

But AFAICS, the pros as is it does help to avoid TC-SC confusion a bit,
not completely but better than nothing. The cons to this is that it may
mislead people into thinking IDN is able to handle TC-SC completely.

>                      Language tag is only a technique to reduce the
> complexity in TC/SC ,  I do not expect programmer will like many
special
> case.   I  just enhansize the issuse can not be neglected.  We all
know the
> registration of ML.com will renew around November,  so there are time
> schedule pressure ,  I  hope they can work in right way and produce
less
> confusings in using TC/SC.  Actually , I should not to worry them if I
> assume they have troubles in it, but it is not so fair to users. For
CJK
> users , we need it work properly.

Actually I am not concern about ML.com renew or registration. That is a
problem Verisign have and their problem. Neither do we schedule our work
to fit their pressure. This WG have our own charters and goals and I do
not think we should adjust what we do for any particular companies.

If your concern is to help Verisign to do TC/SC correctly in ML.com,
then the best way is to talk to Verisign directly since we (in this wg
or ietf) have no control what they (or any particular company) do
anyway.

-James Seng