On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 7:01 AM, John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Any proposal for a new gTLD must satisfy a number of "string >> criteria" that will be specified explicitly in the RFP, >> including the requirements that the U-label must not: >> >> (a) be identical to an existing TLD; > > Is "сом" identical to "com"? (the first of these is U+0441 > U+043E U+043C)
The current principle is that it should be be a "confusing string", which is vague enough to cover the case above (but perhaps not able to cover .co) >> (b) be identical to a Reserved Name; > >> (c) consist of a single character; > > I've heard it argued repeatedly that this is an unreasonable > rule for ideographic characters. I don't have an opinion, but > hope that ICANN has considered that case in full details. This is where we dive into a discussion what is a "character". In ideographic based language, there isnt a concept of a "word". For example, Chinese, Japanese and Korean are actually "phonetics language", and that ideograph characters are used to express the phonetics. A "word" or more accurately "morphemes" can be express in a single or more ideographs. A single latin character is unlikely to be useful by itself (except of a and i) but thats not the case in CJK. If the condition is that "no single ASCII character", I may be neutral about it (since a single ideograph would never translate to a single ASCII character in the zonefile, due to the xn-- prefix) but if the "character" is defined more broadly to cover "U-label" character, then I would have strong objections. Incidentally, I remember it is a standing "tradition" that labels may not be a single ascii character. But is there any technical reason we should forbid it? (e.g. 6.cn have not kill any kittens yet) -James Seng _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
