Folks,
I've just spent several hours reading my way through much of
through the long and fascinating thread caused by the BOF
announcement. I should probably just remain silent, but the
traffic causes me to have a few thoughts. Some of them have
been mentioned on the list in one form or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So my question remains: are we doing the 3 billion asians a favor by
forcing them to be able to tell the difference between e-caron and
e-breve?
I got some advertising for www.renault-branchenloesungen.de the other
day, because I'm part of the target group clearly
Dave Aronson wrote:
Think also of many businesses that cater to the general public, from
bleeding-edge geeks like us, to those who can barely spell PDA and
don't know what one is.
I think the only times I've seen anybody use PDAs to exchange contact
information were at IETF meetings, in the
On Thu October 30 2003 17:24, Markus Stumpf wrote:
- How long will there be paper business cards? Don't a lot people
already exchange business cards per handheld/organizer?
IMHO, always, even for ones with email addresses (and URLs and so on) on
them. Even those who lug PDAs around
At 23:24 30/10/03, Markus Stumpf wrote:
A big fair in Munich had tested kinda electronic cards lately. As you
buy your ticket you type in your contact data and it is printed on the
card as a barcode. Exhibitors had barcode readers and special
software, so if you want to make a contact you hand
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 06:49:13AM -0600, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
I agree with Dave in the general case (the goal is to go beyond
today's Internet), but am wondering if that also requires us to go
beyond today's language capability when we start leaking these
addresses between enclaves. I am
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Are we doing *anybody* favors ...
Contrary to super heated claims about unfairness and disenfranchisement,
the purposes of this approaching train wreck do not include doing any
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 09:50:06AM -0500, John Stracke wrote:
Dave Aronson wrote:
Think also of many businesses that cater to the general public, from
bleeding-edge geeks like us, to those who can barely spell PDA and
don't know what one is.
I think the only times I've seen anybody use
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 05:11:20PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Puig wrote:
Agree. Another point is that many firms print contact / support / sales
mail addresses on documents. So may also individuals in some
circumstances (teachers on the hard copy of their teaching doc,
classified advertisements on
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 09:50:06AM -0500, John Stracke wrote:
I think the only times I've seen anybody use PDAs to exchange contact
information were at IETF meetings, in the hallways, when people had time
to kill. It just takes too long. Typically, when two companies are
meeting, and
Valdis,
I think your example underscores the difference between localization
of an interface to make use of local language/script and globalization
that permits interworking among all parties, independent of their local
language and script.
the confusion between these two (familiar user
Valdis,
VKve Mark actually *does* have a *very* valid point - on today's internet, if you
1. The goal is to go beyond today's internet. (But then, that is always the
goal of a new standard.)
2. Although the primary focus of IETF work is to make standards for global
interoperability, there are
Ummm, I'm not a Genius of E-mail, but I have sent a few. :-}
The very-helpful scenario Valdis included a couple of notes back (if
we punt on common ability to use Latin glyphs) has happened in my
life, at the presentation level - I've been swapping e-mail back and
forth with some very talented
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 09:13:55 PST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Forget Mongolian. Think Chinese and Hindi, plus related languages that
use their character sets. Between the two of them you have nearly 3
billion potential users, i.e. half the world's population. Admittedly
not all of them are
On Thu October 30 2003 07:49, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
leaking between two non-Latin
enclaves is where the rubber meets the road,
Specifically, two enclaves with *different* non-Latin character sets.
(Probably what you meant, but)
I've worked with too many smart people from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 07:32:46 +0800, James Seng said:
to your opinion but please do so in other place, and not here. The group
is suppose to work on Internationalization of Email address
(identifiers), not debate whether we need it or not.
Any group that addresses
At 01:24 30/10/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:33:31 +0800, Tan Tin Wee said:
snip
If whatever Mongolia was doing was guaranteed to stay in Mongolia, it wouldn't
be an issue. However, people inside the enclave *will* want to communicate
with outsiders as well - and the
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 15:13:06 GMT, Zefram said:
It doesn't start to get tricky until we get into the eastern European
languages -- ASCII only intentionally provides western European
diacriticals.
Macrons and carons and cedillas, oh my... :)
Actually, ASCII doesn't intentionally provide any
I'm curious: why do you think that everyone would be
satisfied with Latin characters only, and no non-Latin characters?
Mark
__
http://www.macchiato.com
Yes, I also agree. Especially in India, we have more than 10 Languages ( Hindi, Tamil,
Telugu,
TED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "IMAP Extensions WG"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue, 2003 Oct 28 00:50
Subject: Re: [idn] Re: FYI: BOF on Internationalized Email
Addr
PROTECTED]; Abhijit Menon-Sen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue, 2003 Oct 28 08:12
Subject: Re: [idn] Re: FYI: BOF on Internationalized
Mark,
(Another
jibe, citing the fact that utf-8 is, itself, a modification to raw unicode
is probably worth repeating, here.)
MD When Unicode is expressed as a series of bytes, there are a number of equally
MD valid sncoding schemes (aka serializations). UTF-8 is one of those schemes, and
MD
John,
JC That's only true if you take the position that there are no native/direct/raw
JC encodings of Unicode.
Oh? You mean that Unicode does not fit directly -- ie, with no special
encoding rules -- into 32 bits, or 24 bits, or somesuch.
You mean that Unicode does not need special rules to
As for the protocol, I could have sworn that users do not type protocol data
units directly, or at least that they haven't for roughly 25 years. (Another
jibe, citing the fact that utf-8 is, itself, a modification to raw unicode
is probably worth repeating, here.)
While it doesn't really
Dave Crocker scripsit:
That's right. It is an encoding. Raw Unicode takes more than 8-bits. Lots
more. UTF-8 is a method of encoding those raw bits into a non-raw form.
[snip]
It might be a more efficient encoding, but it is no more native or direct
or raw than ACE.
That's only true if
Dave Crocker scripsit:
Oh? You mean that Unicode does not fit directly -- ie, with no special
encoding rules -- into 32 bits, or 24 bits, or somesuch.
Nope. The Unicode character set maps characters to integers. How the
integers are mapped to bytes is defined by the encoding rules, of which
On 10:31 28/10/03, Zefram said:
I think the first task in this area should be to investigate the nature
and degree of desire for non-ASCII local parts. This desire needs to be
weighed against the benefits we derive from writing all local parts in a
small, fixed alphabet (ASCII printables).
May
Crispin,
You need to get out of US (or Wsshington) more often.
-James Seng
I am not convinced that it is possible to use a computer on the Internet
anywhere in the world without at least a basic acquaintance with Latin
script.
I do not believe many individuals (other than primary school
I do not believe that this is true for Chinese. AFAIK, Chinese primary
school kids use Latin script with hanyu-pinyin as a stopgap prior to their
mastery of Han script (which takes many years).
Nope. Hanyu Pinyin was designed to replace the Han ideograph but it
never did.
Note that when I say
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 07:32:46 +0800, James Seng said:
to your opinion but please do so in other place, and not here. The group
is suppose to work on Internationalization of Email address
(identifiers), not debate whether we need it or not.
Any group that addresses how and for which contexts
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:33:31 +0800, Tan Tin Wee said:
And if they need to send email to outsiders, then they would
send in ASCII email address, as routinely as they would
OK.. I get that part. Now for the big question: You're there in this
Mongolian intranet, and find you need to ask me a
Folks,
On the theory that discussions go better when they have a concrete
deliverable, here is a proposed charter for a proposed working group.
The following started with Mark Crispin's text, although it might not look it.
Besides the usual goals for a charter, the following text attempts to
- good start!
- timeline seems pretty agressive... will see.
- would probably good to have a requirement document upfront. Might not the
same way that idn requirement ends up, but a narrow-implementable
requirement would help to have a concensus (hopefully) on what needs to be
done.
- while the
Roy,
Mail Internationalised Local-Part (MILP)
RB Even though, given IDNA now exists as a proposed standard, the main
RB issues relate to the local part, the issue under discussion is that of
RB internationalized mail addresses, not just internationalized
RB local-parts.
Really? What work
On 10/27/03 at 6:42 PM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
RB Even though, given IDNA now exists as a proposed standard, the main
RB issues relate to the local part, the issue under discussion is that of
RB internationalized mail addresses, not just internationalized
RB local-parts.
Really? What work
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 05:39:32PM -0800,
Mark Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 76 lines which said:
We should remember that for a great many people in the world, Latin letters are
quite unnatural; it'd be a bit like if we had to use Greek letters in all email
addresses.
It
Dave Crocker wrote:
This poses a fundamental
barrier for users needing mail addresses to be expressed in a richer set of
characters,
I have yet to see this need established. Everyone who has supported
internationalised mail addresses has
Pete,
RB Restricting the disucssion to local-parts runs the risk of excluding
RB other potentially relevent issues.
PR I agree. Limiting discussion at this point to local-part does not
PR take into account some of the possibilities.
That was exactly the intent of the text.
We have already seen
Mail Internationalised Local-Part (MILP)
Even though, given IDNA now exists as a proposed standard, the main
issues relate to the local part, the issue under discussion is that of
internationalized mail addresses, not just internationalized
local-parts.
Restricting the disucssion to
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Keith Moore wrote:
Thanks for taking a stab at a problem statement. I'd like to drill down
on this just a bit.
What is the source of the growing need? Is it:
[snip]
I agree that this needs to be stated, but someone other than me will have
to do it.
I believe that the
: [idn] Re: FYI: BOF on Internationalized Email Addresses (IEA)
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Keith Moore wrote:
Thanks for taking a stab at a problem statement. I'd like to drill down
on this just a bit.
What is the source of the growing need? Is it:
[snip]
I agree that this needs
]
Sent: Mon, 2003 Oct 27 17:15
Subject: Re: [idn] Re: FYI: BOF on Internationalized Email Addresses (IEA)
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Mark Davis wrote:
I'm curious: why do you think that everyone would be satisfied with Latin
characters only, and no non-Latin characters?
I didn't say that. I stated
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Mark Davis wrote:
I'm curious: why do you think that everyone would be satisfied with Latin
characters only, and no non-Latin characters?
I didn't say that. I stated my belief that, for reasons of practicality,
most individuals in regions which do not use Latin script
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Mark Davis wrote:
Based on what I've seen, I think it quite likely that people will want email
addresses in their native script, even if that means that outsiders can't
(easily) use those email address.
That may well be the case.
We should remember that for a great many
At 2003-10-27 19:37:37 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not believe many individuals (other than primary school children) are
literate in their native language but are completely illiterate in Latin
script. This does not mean being able to read or write the English
language; rather, this
Mark Crispin writes:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
(I agree that it's currently nearly impossible to use computers if
one isn't familiar with the Latin script, of course.)
Which probably makes the rest of this discussion academic, unless
we're going to undertake solving *that*
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
The number of people in India who can read and write only their native
language, but have no usable knowledge of Latin script, is much larger
than the tiny number who are familiar with both. I'm told that this is
true for many native speakers of
Mark Crispin wrote:
In many regions where Latin
diacriticals are used, there is no acceptable transform of a surname to a
form that does not use diacriticals. Simply omitting the diacritical
causes (at least to the inhabitants of those regions) a
it appears to me that this thread is not very different from the idn
considerations on usage of idn in the world. So what is really new in this
discussion?
Marc.
-- Tuesday, October 28, 2003 07:10:59 -0800 Mark Davis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote/a ecrit:
(I agree that it's currently nearly
Excuse me, but could you please constrain this
conversation to fewer than 9 (nine!) e-mail lists?
The BOF description lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the
discussion list, but this discussion is being
cc:ed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd suggest that you
move this discussion to whichever of those lists
is
--On Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:12 -0500 Marc Blanchet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it appears to me that this thread is not very different from
the idn considerations on usage of idn in the world. So what
is really new in this discussion?
See the draft.
Quick answer: DNS interfaces really
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:39:32 PST, Mark Davis said:
email addresses. Mr. Tanaka can have one with Latin letters and one with
Japanese (e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
This gets interesting in the context of a reply all.
Apologies for breaking the UTF-8 in the quote, but it's illustrative - if the
John,
JCK If one is going to consider internationalization of email
JCK addresses in a way that permits them to move through the mail
JCK protocol in some traditional Unicode encoding (e.g., UTF-8),
JCK then
...then we get to repeat the mime/esmtp debates all over again. After all,
why should
At 11:54 AM -0500 10/28/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The BOF description lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the
discussion list, but this discussion is being
cc:ed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd suggest that you
move this discussion to whichever of those lists
is actually correct.
It is [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Patrik,
Thanks for putting this BOF together.
PF Where should the IETF tackle it?
I am not sure I understand this question. Please clarify.
PFWhat are the next steps for the IETF?
Would it help to have a draft charter for the meeting? (I realize that the
presence of such
PFWhat are the next steps for the IETF?
Would it help to have a draft charter for the meeting?
let's back up a step further.
what problem are we trying to solve here?
Keith
On 10/27/03 at 10:52 AM -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
DC: Would it help to have a draft charter for the meeting?
As was mentioned in the draft agenda at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/03nov/iea.txt, we want to simply start the
discussion, not immediately attempt to charter a working group.
let's back up
-- Monday, October 27, 2003 10:52:22 -0500 Keith Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote/a ecrit:
PFWhat are the next steps for the IETF?
Would it help to have a draft charter for the meeting?
let's back up a step further.
what problem are we trying to solve here?
to me, that (problem we
Mark,
Thanks for taking a stab at a problem statement. I'd like to drill down
on this just a bit.
What is the source of the growing need? Is it:
a. for users of many languages (particularly those not using Latin alphabets)
email addresses are difficult to remember
b. for users of many
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Keith Moore wrote:
what problem are we trying to solve here?
I agree with Keith. This isn't to say that I dispute that there is a
problem to be solved -- indeed, I think that the problem is apparent to
all -- but we must have a problem statement that we all agree upon
mc As presently constituted, email addresses are limited to the 26
mc Latin alphabetics, 10 digits, and a limited number of special
mc characters in the ASCII character set. There is a growing need to
upper and lower case alphabetics
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (WJCarpenter)PGP 0x91865119
38 95 1B
On Mon October 27 2003 12:30, WJCarpenter wrote:
mc As presently constituted, email addresses are limited to the 26
mc Latin alphabetics, 10 digits, and a limited number of special
mc characters in the ASCII character set. There is a growing need
to
upper and lower case alphabetics
62 matches
Mail list logo
