Re: FYI: BOF on Internationalized Email Addresses (IEA)

Pardon me: I find my english language skill is proportional to the # of 
hours I sleep. I desperately need them after my trip...

My point is: We been thru this debate before in the early days of IDN 
and we are just rehashing old arguments here. This isn't productive.

If you assume that anyone needs to know latin before using Internet, you 
are allowed to do so. But that view is not universal accepted (ie. rough 
consensus). Unfortunately, the reverse is also not universal accepted 
either.

So this become a reglious debate of what should/can be done and what 
shouldn't. I dont expect to change Mark's or your view but neither will 
I change my view because we both comes from different fundamental 
assumptions.

So the only reasonable way forward I can see is we agree to disagree. 
You choose which side you want to be and pursue it, and I choose mine. 
If you feel latin is all we need in future (for whatever reasons), stick 
to it. But dont deny us an alternative path.

And if you choose to do deny us anyway, then dont be surprise when 
people on the other side decided to go on their own, or worst, in their 
own separate ways.

-James Seng

> [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 07:32:46 +0800, James Seng said:
>>
>>> to your opinion but please do so in other place, and not here. The 
>>> group is suppose to work on Internationalization of Email address 
>>> (identifiers), not debate whether we need it or not.
>>
>>
>>
>> Any group that addresses "how" and "for which contexts" without having
>> a good grasp on "why" is inventing solutions in search of problems.
>>
>> Mark actually *does* have a *very* valid point - on today's internet, 
>> if you
>> cannot recognize and enter the glyphs for at least c, h, m, o p, t, w, 
>> ':',
>> '@', '.', and '/' you are effectively unable to use the internet.  It 
>> may not
>> make any sense to you, but you can at least recognize and enter them 
>> (note that
>> this same issue was one of the biggest arguments against the .biz 
>> domain).
>>
>> So.. having established that if they're currently using the internet, 
>> they can at least
>> recognize and enter the Latin glyphs, this raises a number of *very* 
>> important questions:
>>
>> 1) Is there reason to *not* expect said knowledge of Latin glyphs in 
>> the future?
>> If not, what user group(s) will be literate but not know the Latin 
>> charset?
>>
>> 2) Is a "community" approach acceptable?  Is usage of Han OK as long as
>> you're interacting with other Han users, or are the issues of leakage 
>> too high?
>>
>> 3) What *are* the issues of leakage? What am I expected to see if I 
>> get some Han,
>> and how am I to interact with it?  Equally important, what does the 
>> Han user do
>> with my leaked Latin-A characters?
>>
>> 4) Here's a somewhat related issue - looking at the U0100.pdf from 
>> www.unicode,org,
>> I had to enlarge page 2 quite a bit before I could see the difference 
>> between the glyphs
>> at 0114/0115 (capital/small e with breve) and 011A/011B (capital/small 
>> e with caron).
>> And I know my way around most of the Latin characters - our 
>> hypothetical Han
>> user is going to be swinging in the breeze if he gets a business card 
>> with e-caron on it.
>>
>> And if you can't safely put e-caron on a business card, why are we 
>> bothering?
> 
>