Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case
One of the classifications where we have disagreement is over Upper Case / Lower Case. Here is how I see it. We (at ICANN, and folks at the IETF) know that domain names are strictly lower case. But the vast majority of Internet users know no such thing. They have decades of experience which teaches them that Upper Case and Lower Case are totally interchangable. Thus, if they see www.icann.org or WWW.ICANN.ORG or http://www.icann.org they will expect (correctly!) that all of those will take them to the same website. The Least Astonishment Principle therefore requires us to recognize that, for our user community, Upper and Lower case are variants. Period. We may wish that this was not the case. But we cannot ignore the reality that it is. I would also note that the IP's words on this subject are "the GPs are not required to consider capital letters". We do not live in a world where everything which is not required is forbidden -- and we have not been forbidden to consider the reality before us. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct)
Hi Bill, On 05.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote:
One of the classifications where we have disagreement is over Upper Case / Lower Case. Here is how I see it.
We (at ICANN, and folks at the IETF) know that domain names are strictly lower case. But the vast majority of Internet users know no such thing. They have decades of experience which teaches them that Upper Case and Lower Case are totally interchangable. Thus, if they see www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org/> or WWW.ICANN.ORG <http://www.icann.org/> or http://www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org/> they will expect (correctly!) that all of those will take them to the same website. The Least Astonishment Principle therefore requires us to recognize that, /for our user community/, Upper and Lower case are variants. Period. We may wish that this was not the case. But we cannot ignore the reality that it is.
I agree that these letters may be confused by some internet users. Nevertheless, our work is not the only check to avoid TLDs from being registered that would be confused. There is always the second manual review.
I would also note that the IP's words on this subject are "the GPs are not required to consider capital letters". We do not live in a world where everything which is not required is forbidden -- and we have not been forbidden to consider the reality before us.
Ok, they say we MAY do this, but we don't have to. Therefore I'd say that we first concentrate on the work we have to do. Let's make sure we can finish that in time. If then there is some time left, great, we can take a look at the capital letters and whether there will be in-script and out-of-script variants. The additional work is not to be underestimated. We have to compare all capital letters with all lower-case ones, as well as all capital letters with each other. I am not generally against doing this, just not at this time. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
Dear Bill, I am a little bit confused with this discussion. I cannot remember that I have ever seen the domain name written in uppercase. May be it is the result of not paying attention to such cases. Could you please give me some examples of ASCII domains written and registered in uppercase? Regards Mirjana Od: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> U ime Bill Jouris Poslato: Thursday, July 5, 2018 19:11 Za: Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Tema: [Latingp] Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case One of the classifications where we have disagreement is over Upper Case / Lower Case. Here is how I see it. We (at ICANN, and folks at the IETF) know that domain names are strictly lower case. But the vast majority of Internet users know no such thing. They have decades of experience which teaches them that Upper Case and Lower Case are totally interchangable. Thus, if they see www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/> or WWW.ICANN.ORG<http://www.icann.org/> or http://www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/> they will expect (correctly!) that all of those will take them to the same website. The Least Astonishment Principle therefore requires us to recognize that, for our user community, Upper and Lower case are variants. Period. We may wish that this was not the case. But we cannot ignore the reality that it is. I would also note that the IP's words on this subject are "the GPs are not required to consider capital letters". We do not live in a world where everything which is not required is forbidden -- and we have not been forbidden to consider the reality before us. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct)
Dear Mirjana, On 09.07.2018 14:22, Mirjana Tasić wrote:
Dear Bill,
I am a little bit confused with this discussion. I cannot remember that I have ever seen the domain name written in uppercase. May be it is the result of not paying attention to such cases. Could you please give me some examples of ASCII domains written and registered in uppercase?
you do not *register* domains in upper or lower case. The domain name is always case insensitive. You can simply try this out yourself. If you go to http://icann.org or http://Icann.oRg It's all the same. Therefore you don't know, if some company simply always publishes its internet address in capital letters. Or mixed if they want to be very cool/hip/modern, whatever. ;-) Therefore domain names can look the same, although they are different. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
Dear all, Now I understand the point. My opinion that such cases cannot be prevented by developing any variants rules. This is the crime and should be punished accordingly. Regrds Mirjana -----Originalna poruka----- Od: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> U ime Michael Bauland Poslato: Monday, July 9, 2018 15:02 Za: latingp@icann.org Tema: Re: [Latingp] ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear Mirjana, On 09.07.2018 14:22, Mirjana Tasić wrote:
Dear Bill,
I am a little bit confused with this discussion. I cannot remember that I have ever seen the domain name written in uppercase. May be it is the result of not paying attention to such cases. Could you please give me some examples of ASCII domains written and registered in uppercase?
you do not *register* domains in upper or lower case. The domain name is always case insensitive. You can simply try this out yourself. If you go to http://icann.org or http://Icann.oRg It's all the same. Therefore you don't know, if some company simply always publishes its internet address in capital letters. Or mixed if they want to be very cool/hip/modern, whatever. ;-) Therefore domain names can look the same, although they are different. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
Mirjana, If you open the base RFCs of DNS, RFC 1034 and RFC 1035, you will find many examples of domain names, most of them real (at least at that time) I think. They are mostly written in upper case, e.g. A.ISI.EDU. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1034 Over the years, domain names have been written in lower case, upper case and mixed case. And you still see that. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/ -----Original Message----- From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs> Date: Monday, 9 July 2018 at 15:16 To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>, ICANN Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear all, Now I understand the point. My opinion that such cases cannot be prevented by developing any variants rules. This is the crime and should be punished accordingly. Regrds Mirjana -----Originalna poruka----- Od: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> U ime Michael Bauland Poslato: Monday, July 9, 2018 15:02 Za: latingp@icann.org Tema: Re: [Latingp] ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear Mirjana, On 09.07.2018 14:22, Mirjana Tasić wrote:
Dear Bill,
I am a little bit confused with this discussion. I cannot remember that I have ever seen the domain name written in uppercase. May be it is the result of not paying attention to such cases. Could you please give me some examples of ASCII domains written and registered in uppercase?
you do not *register* domains in upper or lower case. The domain name is always case insensitive. You can simply try this out yourself. If you go to http://icann.org or http://Icann.oRg It's all the same. Therefore you don't know, if some company simply always publishes its internet address in capital letters. Or mixed if they want to be very cool/hip/modern, whatever. ;-) Therefore domain names can look the same, although they are different. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
The problem is that what is written (as opposed to what is registered) can be in mixed case. So what the *user* sees -- in an email or a document or on a website -- may be in any mix of cases. No matter what the mix of cases, the link will always go to the same place. The "crime" is not by the user, but by the person writing the link -- and doing it in a way that they have done it for decades. I have seen ICANN's website done as both icann.org and ICANN.org. I see companies, especially those with multi-word names, capitalize the first letter in each word: USBank.com for example. It may be regretible that this has become a common practice, but that's the long-standing reality out there. And there is no "punishment" available. The user, after all, is typically not the one who created the link in the document. What the variant rules can do is keep someone who does not own the original domain from creating something that the user will see as the same. Thus allowing him to scam users. For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com. Which, in turn, means that the owner of every .com domain in the world will be faced with a choice: - register his domain name again, in the new TLD - let someone else register his domain name there, and live with the possibility that his customers will find themselves going somewhere else. The first option doubles his expense -- great for the companies which sell domain name registrations, but not for the user community. Not to mention the possibility that the company simply doesn't realize the problem exists until it is too late -- most companies do not routinely keep track of new TLDs being created. And security problems involved in the latter situation are obvious. It isn't particularly hard to write variant rules which will stop that happening. There are a handful of Cyrillic letters, and a couple of Greek letters, where the lower case looks like a Latin upper case letter. We just include them in our list of variants, and the problem doesn't arise. It's not something that will take us any significant amount of time to do as we go thru our process . . . once we determine that it is appropriate to do so. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) From: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs> To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org> Sent: Monday, July 9, 2018 6:16 AM Subject: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear all, Now I understand the point. My opinion that such cases cannot be prevented by developing any variants rules. This is the crime and should be punished accordingly. Regrds Mirjana -----Originalna poruka----- Od: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> U ime Michael Bauland Poslato: Monday, July 9, 2018 15:02 Za: latingp@icann.org Tema: Re: [Latingp] ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear Mirjana, On 09.07.2018 14:22, Mirjana Tasić wrote:
Dear Bill,
I am a little bit confused with this discussion. I cannot remember that I have ever seen the domain name written in uppercase. May be it is the result of not paying attention to such cases. Could you please give me some examples of ASCII domains written and registered in uppercase?
you do not *register* domains in upper or lower case. The domain name is always case insensitive. You can simply try this out yourself. If you go to http://icann.org or http://Icann.oRg It's all the same. Therefore you don't know, if some company simply always publishes its internet address in capital letters. Or mixed if they want to be very cool/hip/modern, whatever. ;-) Therefore domain names can look the same, although they are different. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
Dear all, I want first to finish what is expected from Latin GP. After that people who want to work on this issue could continue. I am sure I do not have any more power to carry on . Regards Mirjana From: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> Reply-To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> Date: Monday, July 9, 2018 at 19:11 To: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>, Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>, Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case The problem is that what is written (as opposed to what is registered) can be in mixed case. So what the *user* sees -- in an email or a document or on a website -- may be in any mix of cases. No matter what the mix of cases, the link will always go to the same place. The "crime" is not by the user, but by the person writing the link -- and doing it in a way that they have done it for decades. I have seen ICANN's website done as both icann.org and ICANN.org. I see companies, especially those with multi-word names, capitalize the first letter in each word: USBank.com for example. It may be regretible that this has become a common practice, but that's the long-standing reality out there. And there is no "punishment" available. The user, after all, is typically not the one who created the link in the document. What the variant rules can do is keep someone who does not own the original domain from creating something that the user will see as the same. Thus allowing him to scam users. For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em ( м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com. Which, in turn, means that the owner of every .com domain in the world will be faced with a choice: - register his domain name again, in the new TLD - let someone else register his domain name there, and live with the possibility that his customers will find themselves going somewhere else. The first option doubles his expense -- great for the companies which sell domain name registrations, but not for the user community. Not to mention the possibility that the company simply doesn't realize the problem exists until it is too late -- most companies do not routinely keep track of new TLDs being created. And security problems involved in the latter situation are obvious. It isn't particularly hard to write variant rules which will stop that happening. There are a handful of Cyrillic letters, and a couple of Greek letters, where the lower case looks like a Latin upper case letter. We just include them in our list of variants, and the problem doesn't arise. It's not something that will take us any significant amount of time to do as we go thru our process . . . once we determine that it is appropriate to do so. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) ________________________________ From: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs> To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org> Sent: Monday, July 9, 2018 6:16 AM Subject: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear all, Now I understand the point. My opinion that such cases cannot be prevented by developing any variants rules. This is the crime and should be punished accordingly. Regrds Mirjana -----Originalna poruka----- Od: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org<mailto:latingp-bounces@icann.org>> U ime Michael Bauland Poslato: Monday, July 9, 2018 15:02 Za: latingp@icann.org<mailto:latingp@icann.org> Tema: Re: [Latingp] ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Dear Mirjana, On 09.07.2018 14:22, Mirjana Tasić wrote:
Dear Bill,
I am a little bit confused with this discussion. I cannot remember that I have ever seen the domain name written in uppercase. May be it is the result of not paying attention to such cases. Could you please give me some examples of ASCII domains written and registered in uppercase?
you do not *register* domains in upper or lower case. The domain name is always case insensitive. You can simply try this out yourself. If you go to http://icann.org<http://icann.org/> or http://Icann.oRg<http://icann.org/> It's all the same. Therefore you don't know, if some company simply always publishes its internet address in capital letters. Or mixed if they want to be very cool/hip/modern, whatever. ;-) Therefore domain names can look the same, although they are different. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de<mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de<mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org<mailto:Latingp@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org<mailto:Latingp@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
Hi Bill, On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote:
For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com.
as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such a TLD application would always be rejected. Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
I concur. Let’s focus on completing the task within our scope. Visually similarity is dealt by the String Similarity Review process. Dennis Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 10, 2018, at 4:59 AM, Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> wrote:
Hi Bill,
On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote: For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com.
as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such a TLD application would always be rejected.
Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have.
Cheers,
Michael
-- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany
Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de
Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
But the thing is, I believe that this particular case IS within our scope. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Cc: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:45 AM Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case I concur. Let’s focus on completing the task within our scope. Visually similarity is dealt by the String Similarity Review process. Dennis Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 10, 2018, at 4:59 AM, Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> wrote:
Hi Bill,
On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote: For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com.
as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such a TLD application would always be rejected.
Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have.
Cheers,
Michael
-- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany
Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de
Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
I have to admit that I find the variant task strange. Let me first comment the repertoire task. In that we were expected define the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of characters and then evaluate language sources. I think that was a quite reasonable task. When it comes the variant task we are expected to create variant pairs of the most obvious cases (e.g. LATIN SMALL LETTER A vs CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER A) but we are expected to ignore the more complex cases such as LATIN SMALL LETTER M vs CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER EM via LATIN CAPITAL LETTER M). The rational for that is that there will anyway be a process that will look at similarities between characters or candidate TLDs. If that process will have the resources to evaluate the more complex similarities without any prework by e.g. the relevant Generation Panel, then it will get all the obvious cases for free. What is our contribution if we are only to list the obvious cases that the IP already know? I feel it is almost meaningless. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/ -----Original Message----- From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Date: Tuesday, 10 July 2018 at 10:59 To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>, Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>, ICANN Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Hi Bill, On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote:
For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com.
as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such a TLD application would always be rejected. Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
My take on the variants task was that we were trying to identify cases which would always be rejected. So that those cases would not need to go thru the more extensive, time consuming, and labor intensive, process. If something is always going to be rejected, why expend the time and effort to do so manually? Granted, the members of the IP could probably have done the variants task for Latin themselves. But since the process was defined to cover all of the various scripts for IDN, it got left to us. We just are subject to more micromanaging because the IP members know more about (some of) our languages. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) From: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg@iis.se> To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>; Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:50 AM Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case I have to admit that I find the variant task strange. Let me first comment the repertoire task. In that we were expected define the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of characters and then evaluate language sources. I think that was a quite reasonable task. When it comes the variant task we are expected to create variant pairs of the most obvious cases (e.g. LATIN SMALL LETTER A vs CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER A) but we are expected to ignore the more complex cases such as LATIN SMALL LETTER M vs CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER EM via LATIN CAPITAL LETTER M). The rational for that is that there will anyway be a process that will look at similarities between characters or candidate TLDs. If that process will have the resources to evaluate the more complex similarities without any prework by e.g. the relevant Generation Panel, then it will get all the obvious cases for free. What is our contribution if we are only to list the obvious cases that the IP already know? I feel it is almost meaningless. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/ -----Original Message----- From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Date: Tuesday, 10 July 2018 at 10:59 To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>, Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>, ICANN Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case Hi Bill, On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote:
For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com.
as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such a TLD application would always be rejected. Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
participants (5)
-
Bill Jouris -
Mats Dufberg -
Michael Bauland -
Mirjana Tasić -
Tan Tanaka, Dennis