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

["Ric Johnson" <ricjohnsoniii@hotmail.com>]

Dear Mr. Hoffman,

It it possible to set up a seperate mailing list for these types of 
discussions? I joined this list to work on DEVELOPMENT, and it seems to me 
that several members are abusing this forum.

My suggestion is that if anyone wants to continue to beat this dead horse, 
they should do it off THIS list, and anyone that does not understand this 
simple request should be BOUNCED.

Thanks for all your hard work!
Ric Johnson




>From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
>To: idn@ops.ietf.org
>CC: Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr, deng@cnnic.net.cn, 
>erin@twnic.net.tw,   mclaughlin@pobox.com, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca, 
>ajm@icann.org,   alanysho@hkdnr.net.hk, christine.tsang@hkdnr.net.hk, 
>fred@cisco.com,   harald@alvestrand.no, hlqian@cnnic.net.cn, 
>htk@eecs.harvard.edu,   huangk@alum.sinica.edu, iab@isi.edu, 
>idn@ops.ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org,   jasonho@umac.mo, jet-member@nic.ad.jp, 
>jseng@pobox.org.sg, klensin@jck.com,   lee@whale.cnnic.net.cn, 
>lynn@icann.org, mao@cnnic.net.cn, mkatoh@mkatoh.net,   mouhamet@next.sn, 
>narten@us.ibm.com, nordmark@eng.sun.com, paf@cisco.com,   
>qhhu@public.bta.net.cn, sharil@cmc.gov.my, shkyong@kgsm.kaist.ac.kr,   
>snw@twnic.net.tw, sstseng@twnic.net.tw, tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw,   
>vcerf@mci.net, whzhang@cnnnic.net.cn, wschen@twnic.net.tw,   
>wuch@gate.sinica.edu.tw, yktham@umac.mo
>Subject: Re: [idn] Re: Chinese Domain Name Consortium (CDNC) Declaration
>Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 20:07:29 -0800
>
>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.
>
>>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.
>
>- The draft is open-ended about what code points would be prohibited.
>Discussing whether to also prohibit additional code points will
>certainly delay IDN. If you are going to make this draft actually
>represent all of the scripts for which IDN is not perfect, the list
>will be huge, and it will probably affect many billions more people.
>
>If you feel that the IDN WG can deal with all those problems without
>delaying IDN, you have not been paying attention to the way this WG
>moves. :-)
>
>--Paul Hoffman, Director
>--Internet Mail Consortium
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.