Re: [idn] An ignorant question about TC<-> SC

["James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

> > Such mixed TC/SC is possible but not useful in practice. It is
neither
> > "TC" or "SC" and using it is fairly complex to use. Perhaps some
> > statistic of how many such TC/SC mixed label been registered in
practice
> > will be useful.
>
> No, in HK and MO and mainland of china, many people use Mixed TC/SC.
> This is fact we can not avoid.

Yes, TC & SC are used in some place. Many text also have mixed TC/SC.

But I am saying mixing "TC" and "SC" in one single label is uncommon
simply because it is difficult to type. You need to switch from TC IME
to SC IME repeatively.

Do you have any statistic on how many mixed TC/SC registration have been
done so far?

> > I presumed you mean from a "policy view", not technology because if
we
> > cannot guarantee from technology view, ie there is no technology,
then
> > we cannot do so in IDN anyway
>
> No. In current profile of IDNA, there is no technology.
> But this does not mean that there no technology solution, and you
know it,
> but you refuse to accept this fact.

Wait, read my reply again. I am saying what you said is a "policy view"
not a "technology view". Whether we have this technology or not is not
my point.

If there is a technology to do TC/SC, then we can either do it at IDNA
or registration. If there is no technology, then we can do none.

> If we can not guarantee the solution satisfy custom's requirement, the
answer is:
> let user to suffer it, because there hasn't techonolgy solution(as
your words) and
> we will push this  defective solution.

It is all engineering trade off. No solution is perfect.

-James Seng