Subject: Re: Re: [idn] Zone rules (was: wg milestones update)]

From: "Maynard Kang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:52:02 +0800

> Yes, there are TC which maps to two or more SC :-) There are ~4 of them
> on a single character basic. More if you look into 2-3 character words.
>
> -James Seng

Yes, that is true. But I think that is not what Tin Wee is trying to point
out.

One TC character does not map to a two or more SC character "phrase" (the
keyword being "phrase", as used by John in his previous mail), which is the
error in John's understanding that Tin Wee was trying to point out.

TC-SC equivalence would best be described as "many cases of 1-1 mappings
for the same source TC character" and not "1-n mappings" which is gives the
false impression of a possible decomposition process where one character
becomes two (e.g. one character "a with umlaut" -> two characters "a" +
"umlaut")

Although one Chinese character may map to a two or more Chinese character
phrase, that is not strictly a TC-SC equivalence rule, but rather just a
relationship between synonyms (e.g. "录" = "青"). The semantic meaning may be
equivalent, but the pronunciation and number of syllables would be
different (e.g. in English, "car" = "automobile").

This is in contrast to Japanese, where one abstract character in Kanji may
map to a two or more abstract characters in Katakana, and yet still bear
exactly the same semantic meaning, pronunciation, and number of syllables.
But I am no Japanese expert so please correct me if I am wrong here.

maynard

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:17:11 -0400

Maynard (and James and Tin Wee),

I think I understood this.  But many thanks for the
clarifications and my apologies for my less-than-precise
language.

   john

--On Tuesday, 01 May, 2001 20:52 +0800 Maynard Kang
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Yes, that is true. But I think that is not what Tin Wee is
> trying to point out.
> > One TC character does not map to a two or more SC character
> "phrase" (the keyword being "phrase", as used by John in his
> previous mail), which is the error in John's understanding
> that Tin Wee was trying to point out.
> > TC-SC equivalence would best be described as "many cases of
> 1-1 mappings for the same source TC character" and not "1-n
> mappings" which is gives the false impression of a possible
> decomposition process where one character becomes two (e.g.
> one character "a with umlaut" -> two characters "a" + "umlaut")
> > Although one Chinese character may map to a two or more
> Chinese character phrase, that is not strictly a TC-SC
> equivalence rule, but rather just a relationship between
> synonyms (e.g. "å½?" = "é??"). The semantic meaning may be
> equivalent, but the pronunciation and number of syllables
> would be different (e.g. in English, "car" = "automobile").

---

From: [email-masked] (deng)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:12:57 +0800

>maynard wrote:

>different (e.g. in English, "car" = "automobile").

In DNS,there is no meaning. For example,if user register "IBM" and if there isn't a company named "IBM",NOBODY know what meaning the user want to express.It's domain name and not human language.

Deng Xiang
2001.5.3