Re: [idn] Re: peanut gallery

["Mark Davis \(jtcsv\)" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>]

No, that wouldn't do as you intend. The kTraditionalVariant is not a
normative field; it was originally based on an algorithmic comparison
of, as it happens, GB 2812 to GB 12345; while it has improved over
time, I would not put any real weight on it without a thorough review.

Mark
—————

Πόλλ’ ἠπίστατο ἔργα, κακῶς δ’ ἠπίστατο πάντα — Ὁμήρου Μαργίτῃ
[For transliteration, see http://oss.software.ibm.com/cgi-bin/icu/tr]

http://www.macchiato.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam M. Costello" <idn.amc+0@nicemice.net.RemoveThisWord>
To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 18:06
Subject: Re: [idn] Re: peanut gallery


> Mark Davis <mark@macchiato.com> wrote:
>
> > The 'prohibit Simplified Chinese code points', even from a purely
> > technical point of view, is a bad idea.  Trying to do it by just
> > algorithmically comparing SC/TC standards (e.g. GB 2812 to GB
12345)
> > based on mapping tables will give the wrong answer.
>
> Maybe so, but the goal of the proposal was not to settle the
question
> of exactly which characters are simplified and which are
traditional,
> the goal was to prohibit some code points that have no use outside
the
> Chinese community in order to leave the door open for partial TC/SC
> folding in nameprep.  (We know that nameprep could never be capable
of
> full TC/SC folding.)
>
> (And let say again that I favor IDNA as proposed.  This is just a
backup
> proposal in case a compromise is needed.  I hope it's not.)
>
> Here's a more precise version of the proposal:  Prohibit a Han code
> point iff it has a kTraditionalVariant and has only "G" sources
> (China/Singapore).  Would that do what I intend?  The list of such
code
> points could be generated from Unihan.txt by a small awk script.
>
> AMC
>
>