RE: Single-letter names (was: Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on therecent ICANN changes?)

Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com> Mon, 07 July 2008 16:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 947DA3A6A5C; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E073A69F9 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XKecxDlS7thd for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com (wolverine02.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E1483A6A1C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=hardie@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1215449235; x=1246985235; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:to: from:subject:cc:content-type:x-ironport-av; z=MIME-Version:=201.0|Message-ID:=20<p06240609c497f5bee7f2 @[129.46.226.27]>|In-Reply-To:=20<C0F2465B4F386241A58321C 884AC7ECC0706DD8A@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost=0D=0A =20.net>|References:=20<C0F2465B4F386241A58321C884AC7ECC0 706DD8A@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost=0D=0A=20.net> |Date:=20Mon,=207=20Jul=202008=2009:47:10=20-0700|To:=20" michael.dillon@bt.com"=20<michael.dillon@bt.com>,=0D=0A =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20"ietf@ietf.org"=0D=0A=09<ietf@iet f.org>|From:=20Ted=20Hardie=20<hardie@qualcomm.com> |Subject:=20RE:=20Single-letter=20names=20(was:=20Re:=20U pdate=20of=20RFC=202606=20based=20on=20=0D=0A=20therecent =20ICANN=20changes?)|CC:=20"idna-update@alvestrand.no"=20 <idna-update@alvestrand.no>|Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B =20charset=3D"us-ascii"|X-IronPort-AV:=20E=3DMcAfee=3Bi =3D"5200,2160,5332"=3B=20a=3D"4325627"; bh=p2/5VvlvQ+5ey1kvkpcOOuFOps+x0K9EJCbv5wX5lBo=; b=wWsyjm4Ij7IDxrWH8qV1dSGS2CogxeJAH1uwnCdS9eHGp6giHwW2g4EK KRA89kPun1dEgyuBJU23vBXzy/93hM0rVVmGTV6ssL4fLC066VIYs61ZR fi6ZpZLK+yU+vsUiawiJKHKZp3bvrgPe0EUC3X15uqoSWMqyYKNKlbDBQ Q=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5200,2160,5332"; a="4325627"
Received: from pdmz-ns-mip.qualcomm.com (HELO numenor.qualcomm.com) ([199.106.114.10]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 07 Jul 2008 09:47:12 -0700
Received: from msgtransport01.qualcomm.com (msgtransport01.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.148]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m67GlCbv018096 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:12 -0700
Received: from nasanexhc02.na.qualcomm.com (nasanexhc02.na.qualcomm.com [172.30.33.23]) by msgtransport01.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m67GlBOj000956 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:12 -0700
Received: from [129.46.226.27] (129.46.226.27) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.33.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.278.0; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:11 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <p06240609c497f5bee7f2@[129.46.226.27]>
In-Reply-To: <C0F2465B4F386241A58321C884AC7ECC0706DD8A@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost .net>
References: <C0F2465B4F386241A58321C884AC7ECC0706DD8A@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost .net>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:47:10 -0700
To: "michael.dillon@bt.com" <michael.dillon@bt.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
From: Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>
Subject: RE: Single-letter names (was: Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on therecent ICANN changes?)
Cc: "idna-update@alvestrand.no" <idna-update@alvestrand.no>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

At 9:25 AM -0700 7/7/08, michael.dillon@bt.com wrote:
> > However, many concepts in modern Chinese
>dialects require multiple syllables to express them and
>therefore multiple characters to write them. So there isn't
>really a one to one mapping of word, syllable, concept as
>many people suppose.

While there may not be a one-to-one mapping of word,
character, and concept every time, there are many words
and concepts which can be given (and commonly given)
in a single character.  Forcing  those to use multiple characters
to get around a policy limitation may introduce, rather than reduce confusion. 

Why would we want to insist on that?
				Ted
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf