Dear Chris-san, Thank you for your comments. Followings are my responses for some of them.
I believe Mr Yoneya’s algorithm will work.
Thank you, it encourages me a lot.
It is fortunate that 機 ’machine’ / 机 ’desk’ and 発 ’send’ / 髪 ‘hair’ seem to be the only cases where (at least commonly used) different characters in Japanese are the same character in Simplified Chinese. (I haven’t spent as much time with looking for characters that are separate in Chinese but brought together in Japanese. 弁 replaces at least three characters in Chinese, but I think none are common. I can imagine a . 弁当 TLD, so that may be good news for bento companies.)
JGP assessed CGP's draft LGR-1 how it affects to the usage of Japanese IDN. What JGP did and tentatively concluded are: - Comparison of CGP's draft LGR-1 and JGP's draft LGR-1 (with possible variants) - JGP tentatively concluded that serious influence of CGP's variant to Japanese IDN might be very limited - Assessment of occurence of 'may be seriously affected' variants in Japanese JP domain name - JGP tentatively concluded that such variants are mostly used as different character in Japanese IDN
From this assessment, we proposed Japanese LGR-1 with no variant. So, at this moment, JGP does not have much interest to search different variants.
I note the options for the disposition of variants not defined in the LGR-1s (Slide 6), i.e.:
- Blocked if the variant is not in the LGR-1 / Allocatable otherwise
- Blocked if the variant is not in the LGR-1 / Inherit its original disposition in the LGR-1 (Allocatable/Simp/Trad/Both)
For JGP, both is OK. For CGP, the latter seems to be more acceptable. I'd like to have consensus on this during the meeting.
I note that it is difficult to understand Japanese LGR-1, as the characters are not visible.
Attached Japanese LGR-1 repertoire list with visible characters. I hope this is helpful. Regards, -- Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:42:30 +0000 "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Here are some comments, as requested by Hiro.
I reckon I have now caught up after missing the Dallas meeting.
I believe Mr Yoneya’s algorithm will work.
I have spent some amount of time looking for exceptions to various statements in it e.g. Slide 5 “there exists at least one identical ideograph”. (No exception found.)
It is fortunate that 機 ’machine’ / 机 ’desk’ and 発 ’send’ / 髪 ‘hair’ seem to be the only cases where (at least commonly used) different characters in Japanese are the same character in Simplified Chinese. (I haven’t spent as much time with looking for characters that are separate in Chinese but brought together in Japanese. 弁 replaces at least three characters in Chinese, but I think none are common. I can imagine a . 弁当 TLD, so that may be good news for bento companies.)
I note the options for the disposition of variants not defined in the LGR-1s (Slide 6), i.e.:
- Blocked if the variant is not in the LGR-1 / Allocatable otherwise
- Blocked if the variant is not in the LGR-1 / Inherit its original disposition in the LGR-1 (Allocatable/Simp/Trad/Both)
Both case studies are most interesting. I note that there are some labels, e.g. 予园 (with the first character, I think used only in Japan and the second only in Simplified Chinese) that perhaps we would prefer not to see allocatable in the ideal world, but suspect that blocking them would involve adding horrendous complexity.
I note that it is difficult to understand Japanese LGR-1, as the characters are not visible.
I have also been looking for differences between Traditional Chinese characters and Korean hanja. So far I have found one: characters with the progression radical tend to start with two dots in hanja: 逃 and only one in Traditional Chinese: 逃.
Looking forward to Seoul,
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
-----Original Message----- From: koreangp-bounces@icann.org [mailto:koreangp-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of HiroHOTTA Sent: 25 April 2015 18:05 To: KoreanGP@icann.org; ChineseGP@icann.org; JapaneseGP@icann.org Subject: [Koreangp] Proposed Action items before Seoul meeting
Dear colleagues in CGP/JGP/KGP,
If I may, in order for us to make our Seoul meeting efficient and fruitful, I'd like to propose what each of us is expected to prepare well before the meeting.
I know I am very pushy but I think at least we must not use our precious time just to understand the information in front of us for a long time.
Please give comments and let's discuss online about the ToDo's before Seoul meeting .
==
[[Premise]]
ToDo-1 <must> Each participant understands what RootLGR is and
what is expected for GPs to do.
ToDo-2 <must> Each participant understands Yoneya's algorithm
that was already sent to CGP/JGP/KGP by Yoneya and
also agreed by C and J in Dallas, which is attached
to this mail as well
ToDo-3 <must> Each participant understands MSS concept that was
already sent to CGP/JGP/KGP by Dr. Wang Wei, which
is attached to this mail along with HiroHOTTA's
response
ToDo-4 <expected> Participants agree on Yoneya's algorithm as a
framework and also agree on partial usage of MSS
to accelerate our discussion ("partial" means
"J doesn't need to be considered to be incorporated
into MSS") This is expected to be discussed and
finalized online before our meeting
[[Integration Algorithm]]
ToDo-5 <expected> J gets IP's feedback on Yoneya's algorithm
[[MSS/LGR-1]]
ToDo-6 <must> C prepares MSS repertoire, which may be
equivalent to Chinese LGR-1 repertoire (done?)
ToDo-7 <expected> C prepares Chinese variants within MSS, which may
be equivalent to Chinese LGR-1 (planned date is
expected to be declared, if not in time for the
meeting)
ToDo-8 <must> J prepares Japanese LGR-1 repertoire and variants
(there's no variants in Japanese LGR-1 : they
were already sent to CGP/JGP/KGP)
ToDo-9 <must> K prepares the basic idea of Korean LGR-1 repertoire
and variants
ToDo-10<expected> K prepares Korean LGR-1 repertoire and variants
(planned date is expected to be declared, ift
LGR-1 does not come in time for the meeting)
ToDo-11<expected> each of CGP/JGP/KGP assesses the repertoires and
variants that have already been provided by other
GPs as far as possible
[[Logistics/etc.]]
ToDo-12<must> each CGP/JGP/KGP Chair designates a person in charge
of ToDo-5 to ToDo-11 well in advance to the meeting
(expected to post the (names) in replying this mail
by May 1st) - this may accelerate the coordination
a lot
ToDo-13<must> convener fixes the agenda through consultation with
CJK colleagues (Hiro is pleased to behave as the
convener until someone will raise his/her hand)
Hiro
_______________________________________________
Koreangp mailing list
Koreangp@icann.org<mailto:Koreangp@icann.org>