Re: [idn] WG Update

["Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

CJK participants are working hard offline to prepare  drafts for  new solution 
for TC/SC/Kanji equivalence within IDNA architecture .

Please take this into consideration before making further progress on your own.
Thanks

Soobok

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <liana.ydisg@juno.com>
To: <yves@realnames.com>
Cc: <liana.ydisg@juno.com>; <jseng@pobox.org.sg>; <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] WG Update


> You are correct on what you have said here.  But
> what I have said is correct too.  TC/SC mapping 
> are examples of semantic equivalence and 
> Unicode has not deal with them. 
> 
> So do some TC/SC equivalence in Kanji.  
> 
> Liana
> 
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2001 19:52:11 -0700 Yves Arrouye <yves@realnames.com>
> writes:
> > > I disagree Unicode Consortium to the WG dated 02Sept
> > > recommendation.
> > > 
> > > Unicode has been very effective to collect scripts and glyphs
> > > of all scripts, and even comes up with Unified CJK character
> > > set, which is essential for IDN implementation.  I call this
> > >  the FIRST level of look-alike equivalence.
> > 
> > Unicode does not collect glyphs but characters (and cf. section 2.1 
> > of UTR
> > #17, http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr17/). This is a 
> > fundamental
> > property of the Unicode standard. I am everything but a CJK expert, 
> > but
> > along the same idea, the Han characters were unified because they 
> > meant the
> > same thing (semantics) not because of glyph similarities.
> > 
> > YA
> > 
>