Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
Therefore, could you please clarify whether the file that's now on the Github was produced by translation engines, or taken from said document? I think that's a significant impact on whether or not that file is usable to cover ICANN's requirement.
Thanks for your comments @Alex. The file submitted by Verisign to satisfy Specification 5.4.3 was created using automatic translation of the English Language names of the 193 UN Member states.
[Alexander Mayrhofer] Thanks for the clarification. As i said above, it would be great to hear from ICANN what they intended with the 5.4.3 requirement - more specifically, which components of the date in the document cited in the requirement is to be used. My point is - the requirements are vague, and hence there is no clear way to quantify the quality of a solution. Which, in turn, is bound to create interopability issues.
@Alex, if you have a less-error prone method of arriving at a solution, Verisign would invest some time in reworking the data. But cutting and pasting from the PDF seems error prone. We would need a programmatic solution to consuming those records. And records meant to be consumed programmatically are not generally encoded in PDF. But again, we're open to ideas.
[Alexander Mayrhofer] I totally agree that cut & past from the PDF is extremely error prone, even if there would be someone understanding all the scripts used in the document. Alex