In a message dated 2001-12-02 19:33:03 Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I'm not sure the difference of "marketing solution" and "engineering > solution" you mentioned. > I'm try to assume I know it. So, if a reasonable requirement raise from end > users, we should > find a theorized solution(engineering solution) to meet the requirement. > Then we put it into > practice(marketing solution) and adjust the improper parts. And, real > solution rises. Sorry, I keep forgetting that there are marketing people participating in this discussion. When I said: > It might be a nice marketing solution, but it is not an engineering solution. what I meant is this: Users want a solution to a certain problem, such as SC/TC transliteration. Unfortunately, the sad truth is that not everything users want is necessarily feasible, or even possible. An engineering approach might be to look at the problem, determine whether it must be solved completely or only partially to satisfy the requirements, and then determine how completely the problem can in fact be solved. If it is determined that the problem MUST be solved completely, but CANNOT be, then the engineer must throw the requirements back over the fence to be modified or excised. A marketing solution might be to defer the question of whether a partial solution is adequate, and accept whatever solution can be engineered on the basis that SOME users will be satisfied. After all, satisfied users = $. Except that maybe it turns out that the partial solution was not adequate after all, and those "satisfied" users (who may not have been fully informed of the limitations) end up disgruntled and distrustful of the software. Marketing grumbles internally about the incompetence of the developers in not satisfying the customers' needs, then proposes a round of "fixes" to try to salvage the situation in the next version. I apologize to all the intelligent, thoughtful, ethical and pragmatic marketing people out there for this simplistic and stereotyped picture. Certainly, good marketing decisions are made every day. I do believe, however, that any IDN strategy devised by the Internet ENGINEERING Task Force must be based on an engineering approach. That means that when considering a CJK-specific enhancement to the already-proposed IDN mechanisms, whether it be language tagging or blind SC/TC equivalence or whatever, two questions must always be kept in mind: 1. MUST this problem be solved completely in order to succeed? 2. CAN this problem be solved completely? If the answer to #1 is Yes and #2 is No, then DON'T DO IT. Sometimes, marketers, half a solution is worse than none at all. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California
