Re: [idn] WG Update

[liana.ydisg@juno.com]

Thank you for telling me this, could you please
update me, where they are?  When do I expect
to see the draft? 

Liana


On Sat, 6 Oct 2001 15:05:57 +0900 "Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr> writes:
> 
> 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
> > > 
> > 
> 
>