Re: [idn] Re: Chinese Domain Name Consortium (CDNC) Declaration

["Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Hoffman / IMC" <phoffman@imc.org>


> At 11:29 AM +0800 2/7/02, hoho wrote:
> >1. The TC/SC problem or variant problem comes from Unicode and the
> >decision
> >    to adopt Unicode as the basis to develop IDN technology. If the
> >working
> >    group chooses to use Unicode as basis, then it becomes a partial
> >solution
> >    to the "global" IDN problem because of this side-effect.
> 
> This is exactly wrong. The decision to use the ISO/IEC 10646 
> (Unicode) character repertoire was made to make IDN a global 
> solution. Maybe I missed it, but what other solution has been 
> proposed that is more global than using 10646? We already discussed 
> this in detail on the mailing list many times, and no one came up 
> with anything more global.


Unicode is not designed for identifiers use but rather for
display or printing devices,  from the beginning. But,
Unicode is ever evolving to expand its application areass.
It's astonishing Unicode has not yet any concrete lists of 
TC/SC 1:1 and 1:n equivalences.
I admit UNicode is the best solution as for now , but not the sufficienly
mature solution  enough to serve the global language communities,
especially chinese. IDN deployment is not a reversible process.


> 
> >2. We do not want to delay your process either. Please refer to the
> >draft
> >    "Phased Implementation of Internationalized Domain Names in
> >Applications"
> >    for more details.
> 
> The "phased implementation" draft is sure to cause a great deal more delay.
> 
> - The draft has serious technical errors: the list in section 1 does 
> not even vaguely match the list given in Appendix B.
> 
> - As the draft admits, adopting the draft would have a very serious 
> negative consequence on Japan and Korea. It is very insulting to say 
> to people of other countries "because we have problems we cannot 
> solve with our script, you will be reduced to using phonetic spelling 
> of your names until we come up with a solution, even though we have 
> failed numerous times in the past trying to do this". Discussing the 
> political ramifications of this consequence could take years.
 
Then, you should also admit that the opposite position (taken by this WG now)is also 
very insulting to chinese communities.

Soobok Lee