September 2011 - vip - lists.icann.org

linguistic and cultural support
by jean-michel bernier de portzamparc Sept. 26, 2011

Sept. 26, 2011

Dear all, We, nicknamed "JEDI"s (Jefsey disciples), have often tried to make the IETF understand and respect the implications of linguistic, cultural, political, economical diversities on protocol definition. Jefsey obtained the RFC 4645, 4646, 4647 consensus he wanted. We also obtained the IDNA2008 consensus which was necessary to warranty the internet stability, its capacity to support any diversity by subsidiarity, and the emergence of the IUI. We still have a problem with the IETF/Unicode relations, the WG/PRECIS, the IDNA IAB work, the ICANN/VIP work on variants, extension of the punycode algorithm to support French and and the orthotypography (scripting syntax) of most of the other languages, etc. May be this quote will help some of our colleagues to understand better why the IETF is to "influence those who design, use and manage the internet" for it to offer users with a better multilinguistic support. “We live in a global world,”... “We have to understand that world if we … are going to be able to not only defend this country, but to extend our relationships to others so that we can work together to defend the world that we live in.” “The reality is that we have to reflect the nation we live in and we have to reflect the world we are a part of." “Languages are the key to understanding that world.”... "It’s also critical to the effectiveness of current U.S. military operations." ... "If we are going to advance stability in some of the countries we are fighting in today, we have to be able to understand what motivates those countries, what motivates their people, and to understand their culture, beliefs, faiths, ideologies, hatreds and loves". “So it is crucial to our national security to be able to have a strong language ability”. - Leon E. Panetta (8/23/2011). US Defense Secretary. Mr. Panetta speaks on behalf of the USA, but I believe that if his understanding may be late, it is also true for every other nation. Multilinguistics, as Jefsey defined it from our IETF experience, is the cybernetics of the linguistic diversity. How languages and cultures can be adequately be supported and result in positive synergetic feed backs. Its key recipe seems to be first based upon a true network linguistic neutrality. One does not need to have more than one language to be a multilingist, one just need to understand and/or research how to better support linguistic and cultural diversity. As Mr. Panetta stated, it is critical to stability and effectiveness in our global world. Portzamparc.

2 1

Update on Case Study Reports
by Naela Sarras Sept. 22, 2011

Sept. 22, 2011

Dear Colleagues; The IDN Variant Issues project is rapidly nearing the deadline date for each team to submit their Case Study Issues Reports (30 September). The teams are working very hard to meet the deadline. Several of the teams have gone through at least one, or in some cases two drafts, of their reports already. We would like to share the drafts with you, but as the drafts are rapidly changing, rather than share any of the drafts on this mailing lists, we encourage you to visit the community wiki (https://community.icann.org/display/VIP/Individual+Cases) for the latest drafts that the teams have posted on the wiki. Reports are posted in the documents section for each Case Study Team. Best regards, Naela Sarras ICANN

1 0

Overarching principles used in Devanagari team report
by Naela Sarras Sept. 22, 2011

Sept. 22, 2011

Dear colleagues, During a meeting of the Devanagari Case Study Team meeting last week, the team adopted a set of overarching principles that they will include in their Case Study Issues report. We are sharing this section of the report with the other case study teams in case they find it useful for their respective reports. Best regards, Naela Sarras

2 1

experts
by jefsey Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

Dear all, In order to better understand the positions of the VIP Latin document to the ICANN/BoD (where there are excellent French speakers who may disagree with the conclusions) regarding the "variants" in IDNs, I tried to have look at the mailing list archives and therefore to register in the list. This seems to be reserved to the Member of the Latin VIP team. So, I google them and found the list of 11 expert members. However I am at loss to know who is a linguist and who is speaking/teaching French? Can someone help? This is important since the IETF/WG/IDNAbis shown that the French language orthotypographic support was the most complex issue for IDNs and has to be addressed on the user side (like other orthotypographic issues in other languages) making French support the best testing prototype, as representing the variant top difficulty (majuscules) while being within the ASCII range. Thank you. jfc PS. the list I got includes: Jothan Frakes, Harald Alvestrand, Andrzej Bartosiewicz, Eric Brown, Cary Karp, Nadya Morozova, Francisco Obispo, Giovanni Seppia, Will Shorter, Wil Tan, and Avri Doria. Is there anybody else I missed? ====== Cher tous, Afin de mieux comprendre les positions prises par le document du groupe Latin sur les Variantes dans les IDN devant être remis au CA de l'ICANN (où il y a d'excellents francophones qui peuvent être en désaccord avec ses conclusions) j'ai tenté de jeter un coup d'oeil sur les archives de la liste de diffusion et donc de m'y inscrire. Ceci semble réservé aux membres du "Latin VIP team". Je les ai donc googlé et j'ai trouvé une liste de 11 experts. Je suis toutefois incapable de dire qui y est un linguiste et qui y est un locuteur/professeur de français ? Quelqu'un peut-il m'aider ? Ceci est important puisque le Groupe de Travail IDNA2008 a montré que la prise en compte de l'orthotypographie française était le sujet le plus complexe à résoudre pour les "IDN" et doit être résolu du côté utilisateur (comme les autres problèmes orthotypographiques des autres langues) rendant l'abord du français le meilleur test prototype, car soulevant la pire difficulté (les majuscules) tout en étant dans la zone ASCII. Merci ! jfc PS. La liste que j'ai trouvée comprend : Jothan Frakes, Harald Alvestrand, Andrzej Bartosiewicz, Eric Brown, Cary Karp, Nadya Morozova, Francisco Obispo, Giovanni Seppia, Will Shorter, Wil Tan, and Avri Doria. Ai-je manqué quelqu'un ?

1 0

FW: WHITE PAPER ON "DEFINITIONS" : YOUR COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK REQUESTED
by Naela Sarras Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

From: doc <raymond.doctor(a)gmail.com<mailto:raymond.doctor@gmail.com>> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:13:48 -0700 To: "vip(a)icann.org<mailto:vip@icann.org>" <vip(a)icann.org<mailto:vip@icann.org>> Subject: WHITE PAPER ON "DEFINITIONS" : YOUR COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK REQUESTED Dear colleagues, I had drafted a white paper on the definitions and questionnaires put forward at the Singapore meet which I attended remotely. The paper comprises three sections: 2.1 On Unicode 2.2. DNS 2.3. The main part of the paper dealing with the notion of variant-hood and which links variants with a script typology to arrive at a "unified theory" of variants. The paper was reviewed by Mr Andrew Sullivan and Dr Nicholas Ostler and I am grateful to them for their replies and comments which were extremely useful and constructive. I have also tried to reply to their comments. I am attaching the paper as well as the mails of Mr Andrew Sullivan and Dr Ostler and my replies to their comments. I have preferred to keep the original white paper as such and would like to hear from all colleagues, especially where the issue of variants (which affects us all) is concerned. Your feedback and comments and suggestions would be most helpful. I would suggest the following reading order: 1. WHITE PAPER ON QUESTIONNAIRE ver. 3.1.pdf (application/pdf) 1692K 2. Nicholas Ostler - reply.pdf (application/pdf) 124K 3. Nicholas Oster - remail reply.pdf (application/pdf) 67K 4. Andrew Sullivan - reply.pdf (application/pdf) 177K 5. Andrew Sullivan - email reply.pdf (application/pdf) 72K Thanking you Best regards, Raymond Doctor

3 3

Glossary
by JFC Morfin Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

http://iucg.org/wiki/Multilingualization_-_Glossary has been updated with; - the definitions I gave in my last mail - the definitions given by RFC 3743.

1 0

[rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org: BCP 166, RFC 6365 on Terminology Used in Internationalization in the IETF]
by Andrew Sullivan Sept. 8, 2011

Sept. 8, 2011

Dear colleagues, An early draft of what became the attached RFC is referred to in our initial definitions document for this project. It might be worth having a look at the final RFC as you work on the draft reports. There's a lot in there, and most of it can, I think, be helpful. Best regards, Andrew -- Andrew Sullivan ajs(a)anvilwalrusden.com

2 1

FW: [latin-vip] Loudly spoken opinions - input for today's meeting
by Francisco Arias Sept. 7, 2011

Sept. 7, 2011

I wonder what others think about the ideas in this document posted to the latin team. Apologies to Harald for putting you in the spot. __ Francisco On 8/25/11 7:25 AM, "Harald Alvestrand" <harald(a)alvestrand.no> wrote: >I don't know if I can make today's meeting (conflicts), but I thought >I'd write some opinions. > >This is written as starkly as possible in order to make it very clear >what I think - it may come across as more strident than is really >warranted. Others may have different opinions. > >Anyway, it's a starting point. > >

4 11

oups!
by JFC Morfin Sept. 3, 2011

Sept. 3, 2011

Please read: In French: Etat = Government état = status Upper-cases can or not wear an accent. There is no difference. In ASCII "etat" is supposed to mean both. This kind of confusion cannot be accepted due to its semantic impact. Also, please remember that in this case "E" is just a way to express (in using an upper-case) that E is a majuscule. Unicode has no other way to support the "majuscule metadata" that upper-cases: this is why I said that the lack of upper-case support by IDNA2008 (to the contrary to IDNA2003, which did not affect upper-case entries from end to end, as the DNS does not either) was not bad. It implies the mandatory use of an added middle-netware (I call the IUI and which will offer intelligence on a fringe to fringe basis, between the user's computer plug and its unchanged OS socket. cf. IAB RFC 3238 on OPES). As in some other scripts, the important thing is not to transport the same typography on an end to end basis, but to carry the same message, i.e. data + metadata, on a fringe to fringe basis. Architecturally this important because it affects the kind of technical communication stratum we consider. - In value-added datacommunication (OSI, TCP/IP) the model includes communications oriented metadata in the envelope (along the layers of that model). If there may be a need for the content to be accompanied by metadata : these metadata are conveyed by the "presentation" layer. IDNA2008 institutes the missing TCP/IP presentation layer through the rudimentary "xn--" prefix. This is rudimentary because the metadata is correctly in the header, but not directly accessible (not at a structural address). - the stratum above telecommunication (no metadata) and datacommunications (metadata in the header) is the metacommunications where metadata are sent/obtained by their own. There are therefore two ways to deliver the othotypographic "majuscule" pay-load: - either in using the domain name. We still are in the rudimentary solution, but we can improve it if this becomes a stable extended way to proceed. - or in paralleling the data delivery with a metadata delivery ("the first character of the related domain name is a majuscule"). In this case we are outside of the standard telecommunications and value-added and extended datacommunications: we have entered metacommunications. To date the Internet is not a metacommunications technology. The possible improvement to support metadata, hence to support variants, can be: - to use another presentation, in changing or extending the "xn--" header. - xm-- means that the first letter is a majuscule: - "xn--5-- means that the fifth character is a majuscule or is a figure to take into a local list of numbers - etc. - in extending the punycode syntax and introducing an escape signal. for example "état"="status" and "^état"="Etat". - in acknowledging that this leads to a change of the nature of the domain name field in the TCP/IP packet. It becomes the presentation layer support. This calls for a presentation protocol defaulting to a regular ASCII FQDN. However, this definitely belongs either to the UI in the current IDNA IAB architecture, or to the IUI in the traditional Internet architecture as IDNA2008 read it and in the multitechnology digital ecosystem. This leads to the questions: 1) how does this WG/VIP intend to see its conclusion technically supported? 2) Will ICANN publish an IDNA/ICANN stringprep/stringextract function? 3) Will it develop or specify an IUI? 4) or will it publish its findings as a multilinguistics contribution. jfc

1 0