RE: [idn] A question...

["Jonathan Rosenne" <rosenne@qsm.co.il>]

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. 

Jony


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-idn@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-idn@ops.ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of DougEwell2@cs.com
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 8:01 AM
> To: idn@ops.ietf.org
> Cc: jseng@pobox.org.sg; jw-lin@yahoo.com.tw
> Subject: Re: [idn] A question...
> 
> 
> 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)
> 
> 
>