Thank you for your response, Sarmad. I think I understand. Hiro On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 07:57:43 +0000 Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Hotta-san,
Thank you for the query. Based on internal discussions, kindly find the response below:
As per the "Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels" <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/variant-tlds/draft-lgr-procedure-20ma r13-en.pdf>, the decision of which Unicode code points to include from the MSR in their respective proposals for the Root Zone LGR is up to the Chinese, Japanese and Korean Generation Panels. They may decide not to include a character which “has visual similarity to a symbol that could be abused by people outside CJK area”. However, when a code point that has such potential issues is included in an LGR proposal, ICANN recommends that the relevant Generation Panel(s) point this out in their proposal, as it is released for public comment. The relevant Generation Panel(s) will decide whether to finally include such a code point based on the review of the public comments received.
Regards, Sarmad
-----Original Message----- From: hotta@jprs.co.jp [mailto:hotta@jprs.co.jp] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 2:16 PM To: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain@icann.org> Cc: Edmon Chung <edmon@registry.asia>; ChineseGP@icann.org; KoreanGP@icann.org; JapaneseGP@icann.org Subject: Re: [Japanesegp] [ChineseGP] 答?: Characters likely to cause offence
Dear Sarmad,
This issue may depend on the scope of the RootLGR project mandate. If I may, I'd like to ask the following question to ICANN.
Question here : Providing, a character in Han script means 'lucky' and is sometimes used in strings in CJK area. The character has visual similarity to a symbol that could be abused by people outside CJK area. In this case, should such character be removed from CJK repertoire? Who will decide the removal of the character, and how? Is such removal decision within the scope of RootLGR project? (not within the scope of gTLD application evaluation panels along with public objection appeals?)
Regards, Hiro
On Tue, 12 May 2015 12:19:11 +0900 HiroHOTTA <hotta@jprs.co.jp> wrote:
I agree that GPs had better not try to touch on this kind of cross-cultural issues.
I agree to leave this issue to IP, but I suspect IP can solve that.
If this kind of judgement (i.e., not a script/language-based judgement, but a judgement considering other cultures) is needed, it is likely beyond the ability of RootLGR project. Even IP cannot solve such issues, I believe.
In my understanding, such kind of judgement should be done in the evaluation phase of a TLD application with possible objection mechanism. We should not try to make RootLGR solve all the potential issues we can imagine.
Hiro
On Tue, 12 May 2015 10:40:21 +0800 "Edmon Chung" <edmon@registry.asia> wrote:
Agree with Wangwei. Edmon
-----Original Message----- From: chinesegp-bounces@icann.org [mailto:chinesegp-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of ?? Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 10:35 AM To: 'Yoshiro YONEYA'; 'Dillon, Chris' Cc: KoreanGP@icann.org; ChineseGP@icann.org; JapaneseGP@icann.org Subject: [ChineseGP] 答?: Characters likely to cause offence
I guess both of 卍and ? (swastika, ????????) were imported into Chinese characters from ancient India Buddhism hundreds years ago Both of them mean something like luck or fortune in east Asia. Most western people don’t know them until one of them was borrowed by Nazi.
What about leave the problem to IP or policy guys. Let's finish repertoire, variant coordination and generation rules first.
-----?件原件----- ?件人: chinesegp-bounces@icann.org [mailto:chinesegp-bounces@icann.org] 代 表 Yoshiro YONEYA ?送??: 2015年5月12日 9:55 收件人: Dillon, Chris 抄送: ChineseGP@icann.org; KoreanGP@icann.org; JapaneseGP@icann.org 主?: Re: [ChineseGP] Characters likely to cause offence
Dear Chris-san,
I suspect there may be other characters in there that could cause offence, but ? 5350 could be horribly abused. I realize that the character it represents is used innocently in temples.
The reason why this character (U+5350) is in J-LGR-2 is that this is defined as variant of U+534D in C-LGR-1. U+534D is in J-LGR-1 repertoire, so it was integrated into J-LGR-2 by proposed integration algorithm.
As you see in J-LGR-2.xlsx, U+5350 is marked as (o) or (b), so it will never appear on Root zone if it is used in applied-for string as Japanese IDN TLD.
Regards,
-- Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>
On Mon, 11 May 2015 14:02:14 +0000 "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Yoneya-san,
I mentioned in my last email that one of the things I found in J-LGR-2.xlsx was of a more serious nature.
I suspect there may be other characters in there that could cause offence, but ? 5350 could be horribly abused. I realize that the character it represents is used innocently in temples.
It is not our responsibility to make decisions about cases such as this and as far as I know, no part of the existing system deals with them. However, having observed long discussion over cases such as .xxx and .sucks, alarm bells do go off and one feels one should draw 5350 to the attention of colleagues.
Regards,
Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon
_______________________________________________ ChineseGP mailing list ChineseGP@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/chinesegp
_______________________________________________ ChineseGP mailing list ChineseGP@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/chinesegp
_______________________________________________ japanesegp mailing list japanesegp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/japanesegp