Subject: Re: [idn] A question...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 01:07:04 EST

In a message dated 2002-02-08 12:15:08 Pacific Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

>>> VERBATIM means "word for word". LITERATIM is "letter by letter". This 
>>> is precisely the essence of the problem - you hear a domain name, and 
>>> spell it exactly as you hear it, and it should be found.
>>
>> www.color.com and www.colour.com are not ever going to match.
>
> So we don't mean VERBATIM.

Right, OK, I made a mistake.  So let's try again and see if I can avoid 
obscuring the point this time:

"The same, exact thing will happen with Han logographs.  If # and & are TC 
and SC characters (respectively) that have the same meaning, and the user 
types # when he should have typed & (or vice versa), under the proposed IDN 
system the name will not match.  The user will get a 404, mutter "aw, 
shucks," and type it again, LITERATIM, and the page will appear.  And the 
user will learn that it is important to type the EXACT characters that appear 
on the business card, or billboard, or wherever the name came from."

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California
 (address will soon change to dewell at adelphia dot net)

---

From: "Jonathan Rosenne" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 08:58:09 +0200

How about the telephone?

Jony

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> On Behalf Of [email-masked]
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 8:07 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [idn] A question...
> 
>

---

From: "Bruce Thomson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 16:12:42 +0900

Many people are in the situation where they have to communicate
a string of CJK characters over the telephone, and they have to
get the exact characters (for example in someone's name) and
not just something that sounds and means something similar. It's
a pain, but people deal with it by giving the sound, the meaning,
and and extra details about the structure of the character that may
be needed to pin down the exact glyph.

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 12:14:54 -0800

I think another example is relevant to the discussion TC/SC issue. In
Danish, "aa" is equivalent to "å". So one could argue that a perfect
IDN for Danish would map these sequences of letters together. But
because the Latin alphabets are unified, Danish "a", German "a", Dutch
"a", and so on are all represented by the same code points. Trying to
map letters together on the basis of equivalences in different
languages runs afoul of the fact that the equivalences are not the
same across the different languages. (This is even worse with sorting
rather than matching: in German or English, ö < z, but in Swedish z <
ö. Luckily IDN does not have to sort, however.) What the IDN should do
is account for the non-linguistic, character-based equivalences;
linguistic equivalences should be left to higher level protocols or
registrars.

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