[CCWG-ACCT] Declaration issued in the Booking.com v ICANN IRP

[Dr Eberhard Lisse]

Greg,

to digress slightly and even more fascinatinger :-)-O why will
Thomas Rickert consider NZ and NA not similar while you and I do?
Because he uses a QWERTY keyboard whereas you and I use a QWERTZ one.

In the early days when I was still using a German keyboard it took
me a while to figure out why messages to NZ were bouncing via the
expensive telephone link to NA.

UA and NA are another case.  Handwritten they are extremely
difficult to keep apart...

SU and US for the dyslexic.

Ever thought about bit-wise similarities?  We had a presentation on
one of the TechDays which showed that random events are more common
than originally thought, but AO and AQ (never mind the similarity),
NE and NE, PS and PT, are one bit separated from each other.

On 2015-03-05 13:19, Greg Shatan wrote:
[...]
> Where the SSRP went awry was in its actual results.  I'm not
> prepared to say this was a design flaw or a process flaw.  But the
> results flabbergasted many people.  Somehow it seemed to mutate
> into a "bad eyesight similarity review," since the only two
> "positives" were one where "i" gets confused with "l" and one
> where "rn" gets confused with "m".  Meanwhile, singulars were not
> similar to plurals.  So "hotels" is a similar string to "hoteis"
> but not to "hotel".  "Fascinating," as the late Mr.  Spock might
> say.
[...]

Maybe the answer to hotels, hoteis and hotel, lies in that it is
easier to mistype hotels and hoteis rather than hotel, even if the
Levenshtein distance is the same (1 edit or 1 addition).

el