[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [idn] A question...
VERBATIM means "word for word". LITERATIM is "letter by letter". This is
precisely the essence of the problem - you hear a domain name, and spell
it exactly as you hear it, and it should be found.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
> On Behalf Of DougEwell2@cs.com
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 8:01 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [idn] A question...
> In a message dated 2002-02-07 20:32:44 Pacific Standard Time,
> email@example.com writes:
> > The user behavior education about domain names should be
> that domain
> > names are identifier, not names. They should enter into the
> > exactly as they seen it or reference it.
> Gee, what a concept. Just what we've been saying all along.
> You know what happens today when someone tries to type in a
> misspelled domain
> name or e-mail address, or a case-sensitive URL using the
> wrong case? It
> fails. The user gets a 404, or his mail bounces or
> something. Then he says,
> "Aw, shucks" (or something stronger) and types the identifier
> again, this
> time EXACTLY as he was told to, and the web page appears or
> the mail gets
> sent. And the user eventually learns when it is important to be
> case-sensitive and when it is not so important.
> The same, exact thing will happen with Han logographs. If #
> and & are TC and
> SC characters (respectively) that have the same meaning, and
> the user types #
> when he should have typed & (or vice versa), under the
> proposed IDN system
> the name will not match. The user will get a 404, mutter
> "aw, shucks," and
> type it again, VERBATIM, and the page will appear. And the
> user will learn
> that it is important to type the EXACT characters that appear
> on the business
> card, or billboard, or wherever the name came from.
> Yes, I know TC and SC pairs are pronounced the same, so
> *speaking* a CJK
> domain name would not guarantee that the listener would be
> able to type it
> with the correct combination of TC and/or SC characters.
> Guess what? This
> too is already true with ASCII.
> Did you know there is a very large number called a "googol"?
> I believe it's
> 10 to the 600th power, or something like that. I first heard
> about that
> number decades ago. Now we are in the Web age, and there is
> an important and
> powerful search engine called "Google." (Note the different
> spelling.) If I
> had never heard of Google the search engine, and somebody
> told me to type it
> in, I probably would start with my prior knowledge of this
> pronounced word, and type "www.googol.com." Of course, it
> would fail (or
> maybe it would take me to a totally different site). I would
> then inquire,
> and the person would apologize (maybe) and tell me the ONE
> TRUE correct
> Did you notice what happened? More to the point, did you notice what
> *didn't* happen? Nobody died. No vast fortunes were made or
> lost. Nobody
> lost any business because, for a brief moment, there was some
> confusion about
> how to spell a domain name. The problem was solved easily
> and quickly.
> Now, I would like someone to explain to me why this won't
> work for CJK. Use
> reason and logic, not emotion. Use realistic (not hyper-inflated)
> probabilities. Do not patronize me by simply stating, "Well, CJK is
> different" unless you can explain what is different in THIS
> case. And do not
> send me 50 identically worded responses.
> -Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
> (address will soon change to dewell at adelphia dot net)