Re: Layer 2 and "idn identities" (was: Re: [idn] what are the IDN identifiers?)

["xiang deng" <deng@cnnic.net.cn>]

On: Monday, December 03, 2001 2:46 PM, Doug Ewell wrote:

> In a message dated 2001-12-02 19:33:03 Pacific Standard Time, 
> > It might be a nice marketing solution, but it is not an engineering 
> solution.
> 
> what I meant is this: Users want a solution to a certain problem, such as 
> SC/TC transliteration.  Unfortunately, the sad truth is that not everything 
> users want is necessarily feasible, or even possible.

Correct except SC/TC conversion. There is solution on the desk, so it isn't 
possible, it's existence.

> An engineering approach might be to look at the problem, determine whether it 
> must be solved completely or only partially to satisfy the requirements, and 
> then determine how completely the problem can in fact be solved.  If it is 
> determined that the problem MUST be solved completely, but CANNOT be, then 
> the engineer must throw the requirements back over the fence to be modified 
> or excised.
>
> A marketing solution might be to defer the question of whether a partial 
> solution is adequate, and accept whatever solution can be engineered on the 
> basis that SOME users will be satisfied.  After all, satisfied users = $.  
> Except that maybe it turns out that the partial solution was not adequate 
> after all, and those "satisfied" users (who may not have been fully informed 
> of the limitations) end up disgruntled and distrustful of the software.  
> Marketing grumbles internally about the incompetence of the developers in not 
> satisfying the customers' needs, then proposes a round of "fixes" to try to 
> salvage the situation in the next version.

The problem to you is "SOME", BUT to me is "ALL" CDN users. 

"satisfied users = $", you look down on users. It include youself while you are 
a user.

Before we publish the software, we had find the problem, we'll don't fix it 
and try to salvage the situation in the next version. WHY not salvage the 
situation in this version?

> I apologize to all the intelligent, thoughtful, ethical and pragmatic 
> marketing people out there for this simplistic and stereotyped picture.  
> Certainly, good marketing decisions are made every day.  I do believe, 
> however, that any IDN strategy devised by the Internet ENGINEERING Task Force 
> must be based on an engineering approach.  That means that when considering a 
> CJK-specific enhancement to the already-proposed IDN mechanisms, whether it 
> be language tagging or blind SC/TC equivalence or whatever, two questions 
> must always be kept in mind:
>
> 1.  MUST this problem be solved completely in order to succeed?
> 2.  CAN this problem be solved completely?
> 
> If the answer to #1 is Yes and #2 is No, then DON'T DO IT.  Sometimes, 
> marketers, half a solution is worse than none at all.

If a old patient will die for serious heart disease, there is no way to cure completely.
If a poor nation fall into serious famine, there is no way to help them all.
If the answer to #1 is Yes and #2 is No, then the world will be hell of human being.

Because any IDN strategy devised by the Internet ENGINEERING Task Force 
must be based on an engineering approach. So all engineers have responsibility to 
solve real problem of the world, not just satisfy current achievement. 

As a marketer is not a shameful occupation, a engineer have right to look down others.
The beautify world is not just bulit by engineer.

Regards
Deng xiang