- From: Erik van der Poel <erik@vanderpoel.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:02:33 -0800
- To: "Kane, Pat" <pkane@verisign.com>
- CC: www-international@w3.org
Pat, Are you saying that VeriSign (or a group of people) is manually checking each IDN registration? The spoofed paypal registration got through, so does that mean you are then checking to see whether the registrant subsequently tries to put up a fraudulent Web site or whatever? Such a manual process seems prone to error. Re: "a language table for all languages that we permit from a tag standpoint", that sounds similar in effect to my proposal, where the Unicode character set is first squeezed down to a smaller set via BetterPrep and BestPrep. Then you wouldn't even need a character inclusion table, since the prepping has already shrunk the set. Erik Kane, Pat wrote: > We are not "catering" to anybody, we just recognize that there is no good > way to create a table for a language that has gone from Arabic to Latin to > Cyrillic and back to Latin in about 100 years. It is a stretch comparison, > but look at the rules for mapping Simplified Chinese and Traditional > Chinese. I do sympathize, that is why we monitor script mixing and actual > registrations that contain multiple scripts. What I would like to see is a > language table for all languages that we permit from a tag standpoint.
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 16:02:40 UTC