Re: [idn] summary of reordering discussion

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

> You should not forget that
> han/hangeul are the disfavored script in ACE encoding.

This is news to me :-)

What is the cause of the problem? Is it because of ACE algorithm problem
or is it because of the large number of han/hanguel characters or is it
because of the placement of han/hanguel characters in ISO10646?

I suspect the problem is due to the latter two and not because ACE
algorithm.

Therefore, as an engineer going to solve the problem is either
a) reduce the large number of han/hanguel characters used
b) reorder the placement

I dont forsee we can reduce the numbers of han characters used. In fact,
it seem to be growing as the days goes by. So IMHO, (a) is out.

Therefore, (b) seem to be right choice absolutely.

The next question you should ask is can it be done in IDN WG or should
this be done in ISO/IEC instead? In this case, I see the answer as
fairly obvious.

> no need to remember, but just compare or transscript. short lables
help.
> What if the are displayed in narrow wap phones?

Irrelvant too. To naked eye, a gibberish is a gibberish, whether it is
ACE-gibberish or 8-bit gibberish (for UTF-8 etc), whether the gibberish
is longer or shorter.

A gibberish is always a gibberish.

> For long CJK names, compression ratio reach 30%, and for frequent
names up to 40%.

As I said,

"You should be working to address the problems of reordering. Repeating
the advantage of reordering over and over again is not going to make
these problems go away."

-James Seng