Re: [idn] A question...

[DougEwell2@cs.com]

In a message dated 2002-02-07 20:32:44 Pacific Standard Time, 
jseng@pobox.org.sg writes:

> The user behavior education about domain names should be that domain
> names are identifier, not names. They should enter into the computer
> 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 identically 
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 
spelling.

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)