At 09:07 PM 6/7/2002 -0700, liana Ye wrote:
This is CDNC final comments. Please respect their experties
in dealing with large character sets.
The IETF has showed a great deal of respect for that expertise. It is the
reason the IETF has extended discussion about IDN much, much longer than
was necessary for the core technical effort.
Please show similar respect to the IETF community that created Internet
technology, including DNS and MIME. (My reference to MIME is because it
solved exactly this problem for email. So, the IETF has direct experience
with this type of problem.)
There are many real and serious technical problems that need solving. The
problem you want to solve is one of them. It is real and it is serious.
It also does not yet have an accepted solution.
When you produce a technical specification that solves this problem for the
entire Internet and when you demonstrate that there were support for it
among vendors and users, then there will not be any difficulty getting it
made into a standard.
However we have yet to see such a specification with such support. It is
unreasonable to delay the rest of this effort while we wait forever until
you produce such an accepted specification.
Yes, it is difficult to
standardize character mapping tables, as we know well
enough. Without the mapping tables there is no IDN either.
Yes, you are right on divide and conquor. What is dividable
what is not dividable is what we have been debating on this
list.
IDN divides this issue in a manner than has been demonstrated to work quite
well.
As has been explained many times, the problem that you want to solve has
nothing at all to do with the DNS. It is a much, much more general problem.
UCS is not dividable is your position. I say it is dividable
with langage tag.
You are confusing characters with languages. It is my impression that this
has been explained many times.
d/