Re: [idn] draft about Tradition and Simplified Chinese Conversion[version01]

["ben" <ben@cc-www.com>]

Hi Eric,

From: "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" <brunner@nic-naa.net>
> This pattern of exchange has been going on since an earlier
"contributor"
> made claims about some (undocumented) "supreme system".
>
> Now, if the someone else were any old "contributor" with a "supreme"
> solution, I wouldn't care. The reply to the authors of TSCONV
however
> is written by the co-chair of this working group.
>
> Incidently, the earlier "contributor" of some (undocumented)
"supreme system"
> actually "got it", and dropped that part of his proposal that had
equivalent
> scaling properties to that we are discussing when we are in fact
discussing
> the necessity and sufficiency of intermediate transformations --
mappings
> and the tables or algorithms required.
>

The "Supreme system" is intended to benefit the users of Chinese
Domain Names because TC<->SC is of paramount importance to the Chinese
culture.  The "contributor" never had the intention of making the
"Supreme system" a standard... but had simply tried to offer another
perspective on this TC<->SC problem in the hopes of offering a
solution to this sticky problem.  It has obviously failed in that
respect.

That "old contibutor" is currently too busy (setting up the "Supreme
system") to care whether you care or not.  However that "old
contributor" would like to thank you and the author of the TSCONV for
pointing out the 2^n problem and thereby making the proper
adjustments/modifications to the supreme system.

Thanks,
Ben