Excellent remark! Fu*ß*ball.de was my hope of last week....now with
everybody of us jumping on it, I can 'forget it'. I will have to go for
a more modest name ;)
Yes, I think the current owners of Fussball.de will be notified that
they have 'sunrise period' (=priority period, on new domains, like often
brands have), and are given the choice whether they want to have Fußball
as well. If the reader of the email to them thinks 'What a details, I
think our directors are happy with Fussball.de, DELETE' one of us can be
lucky. Although I have no German domain names at the moment, I think I
will pick one this evening (no matter how bad the name - condition: it
must be a potential ß) to see what happens: whether I am offered *ß,
*and later: having totally different websites on XXXXXXXXXss.de and
XXXXXXXXXß.de . That will hopefully be the start of awareness that in
future, and certainly re. internationalised domain names, people need a
(paid) IDN consultant. And in my heart, that is what I want to be
(rather than building a huge business or trading 'empty' domain names).
People who are also interested, can join (of course also 2011+). To have
credibility as IDN consultant, one needs illustrating examples, and know
about IDN, extensions, punycode and unicode as well. And web data mining ;)
By the way, on some extensions a mix of lettertypes is possible....like
HTML/editor./com, the cursive being Chinese. And on the new Russian
Federation extension, sometimes I managed to register Ukraine instead of
Russian, and sometimes Ukraine was rejected. Interesting times ahead!
And good to put unicode and IDN knowledge together. I will of course be
back to you when I manage to have a ss-ß**'twin' and two different
websites on it.
BR!
Philippe
( On 1-11-2010 18:41, Shawn Steele wrote:
What about fussball.de? Certainly they want fußball.de to continue to
point to them, as it did in IDNA2003.
What’s really needed is a “display form” and a “matching form”.
Linguistically, ss is nearly always identical to ß for matching,
particularly if you want both german and swiss users. However the
preferred “display” form is always one or the other. Eg: Nobody’s
going to expect fussball != fußball; however it’s supposed to be
spelled fußball in Germany and fussball in Switzerland. Although the
fussball.de owners have clearly taken the ss variation as their own,
despite the linguistic rule.
The other cases are similar: there’s little linguistic value in the
variations, but the differences are even more important for correct
rendering of names using those characters.
IDNA2003 favored matching, IDNA2008 favors exact display forms (sort
of, AAA, the automotive club, still gets stuck in a less-preferred
display form of aaa).
-Shawn
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
*On Behalf Of *JP Blankert (thuis & PC based)
*Sent:* Saturday, October 30, 2010 12:32 PM
*To:* Mark Davis ☕
*Cc:* "Martin J. Dürst"; Markus Scherer; [email protected];
stichtingburnout; "Blankert (privé), Jean Philippe"
*Subject:* ss and ß
Nice thought...on the other hand: would it be honest to automatically
double the worth of existing 'Straße.de' owners?
They could sell off Strasse.de and re-start exploiting Straße.de
(selling off: it are 2 different punycodes, difficult to forbid an
owner to sell one of them).
Your solution is known to me in the case of Taiwan, IDN, there they
choose the solution: if you get the name in simplified Chinese, you
get it in traditional Chinese as well.
The joiners I have to study, I found
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=64832607ce9c5637&hl=en
<http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=64832607ce9c5637&hl=en>
Above is not mentioned to trigger an ethical discussion on 'doubling
the ownership or not', it was just a different kind of thought to your
proposed solution, for which: thanks. Am curious how registrants will
go about it. Nice to have found this mailing list, because otherwise I
would have nobody to discuss this with.
Br,
Philippe
On 30-10-2010 20:52, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
Whether or not it was a good idea to have ß in domain names
(post-mapping) is moot at this point, given IDNA2008. The key will be
to manage the transition well. For many years, client software
(browsers, etc.) will be converting ß to ss in domain names. To
prevent serious problems, it's recommended that any registrar that
allows ß to do the following:
If someone attempts to register a label with any ß, check if the
corresponding label with all ss's is registered.
1. If so, reject the registration unless the registrant is
precisely the same.
2. If not, automatically give the registrant both labels.
That way both new and old browsers will continue to work, and security
and operability problems will be avoided: (1) avoids security
problems, while (2) gives correct results for both new and old client
software.
If client software knows that a registrar follows this policy, then it
can then allow ß to be unmapped for that registrar.
The same goes each of the 4 transition characters: /ß, ς, /and the
two/ joiners./
Mark
/— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —/
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 04:57, "Martin J. Dürst"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2010/10/30 9:17, Markus Scherer wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:57 PM, JP Blankert (thuis& PC based)<
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear unicode.org <http://unicode.org> interested,
I discovered at least 1 flaw in the converter tools I used so far (as
Verisign's IDN to punycode converter): none of the ones I checkes
recognises
the German character
ß
(the sz, as from 'Straße' )
correctly, the sign is always dissolved in ss.
This is standard IDNA2003 behavior.
Yes.
It is usually desirable
It is desirable in searching, but it wasn't desirable in domain names.
The reason it got into IDNA2003 is because the IETF was looking for
data to do case mapping beyond ASCII, and the data available from the
Unicode consortium included the 'ß' -> ss mapping, and the IETF didn't
want to change it because they feared that might start all kinds of
discussions on all kinds of (essentially unrelated) issues.
because a) many
German speakers are unsure about when exactly to use ß vs. ss,
Yes, but for many names, it's either one or the other. Essentially, no
rules.
b) the
spelling reform a few years ago changed the rules,
Yes. They got way easier and more straightforward.
and c) Switzerland does
not use ß at all in German.
Yes. But that's no reason to take it away from those who use it.
(at least myself being Swiss I don't think so)
This means that for most purposes it is
counter-productive (and can be a security risk) to distinguish ß and ss.
Well, it can be a security risk to distinguish between 'i' and 'l' and
'1', and so on, and nevertheless, it's being done for good reasons all
the time.
IDNA2008, an incompatible update, by itself does not map characters.
What's more important, IDNA2008 allows the 'ß' as is.
UTS #46
provides a compatibility bridge for both IDNA2003 and IDNA2008, and the ß
behavior is an option there.
Yes. The basic idea in TR #46 is that in a first phase, 'ß' is mapped
to 'ss' for lookup, to give registries with German clients a chance to
their clients to register true 'ß' where necessary. After that, the
mapping can be dropped, so as in the (somewhat distant) future to
allow for cases where a name with 'ß' and a name with 'ss' are
resolved differently.
Regards, Martin.
--
#-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
Geen virus gevonden in het binnenkomende-bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG -www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Versie: 9.0.864 / Virusdatabase: 271.1.1/3227 - datum van uitgifte: 10/30/10 08:34:00
Geen virus gevonden in het binnenkomende-bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
Versie: 9.0.864 / Virusdatabase: 271.1.1/3231 - datum van uitgifte: 11/01/10
08:35:00
