[Neobrahmigp] [lgr] Question about coordination principles for C J and K

[Asmus Freytag]

>
> *From:*Wang Wei [mailto:wangwei at cnnic.cn]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 28, 2014 7:31 AM
> *To:* Sarmad Hussain; 'KIM Kyongsok'; hotta at jprs.co.jp
> *Cc:* ChineseGP at icann.org; LGR at icann.org
> *Subject:* Question about coordination principles for C J and K
>
> Dear Sarmad
>
> During the recent discussion in ICANN 51 and CGP fortnightly meeting, 
> we realized that there is different understandings about the 
> coordination principles proposed by IP.
>
> CGP discussed this issue with J and K, then we drafted a document (as 
> the attached file) including two different solutions based on two 
> different understandings.
>
> Could you please tell us which solution complies the original 
> intention of the coordination principles?
>
> Regards
>
> Wang Wei
>
>

Dear Wang Wei,

the way variants are defined for the integrated root zone LGR matches 
the second understanding - they are what you call "tightly coupled" in 
your document and it is not possible to have the und-Jpan LGR treat them 
as independent while the und-Hani LGR treats them as variants.

2)Opposite to the case 1, the other understanding is that “Variant 
mappings” is a tight coupled relationship which applies in all LGRs, and 
“Variant Type” must be ”allocatable” or “blocked”, illustrated by the 
following example:

*Code Point*

	

*Allocatable Variant*

	

*Blocked Variant*

	

*Tag*

一(U+4E00)

	

--

	

壱(U+58F1)

壹(U+58F9)

弌(U+5F0C)

	

und-hani

壹(U+58F9)

	

--

	

一(U+4E00)

壱(U+58F1)

弌(U+5F0C)

	

und-hani

弌(U+5F0C)

	

一(U+4E00)

	

壹(U+58F9)

壱(U+58F1)

	

und-hani

壱(U+58F1)

	

壹(U+58F9)

	

一(U+4E00)

弌(U+5F0C)

	

und-hani

一(U+4E00)

	

--

	

壹(U+58F9)

弌(U+5F0C)

壱(U+58F1)

	

und-Jpan

壹(U+58F9)

	

--

	

一(U+4E00)

弌(U+5F0C)

壱(U+58F1)

	

und-jpan

弌(U+5F0C)

	

--

	

一(U+4E00)

壹(U+58F9)

壱(U+58F1)

	

und-jpan

壱(U+58F1)

	

--

	

一(U+4E00)

壹(U+58F9)

弌(U+5F0C)

	

und-jpan

In this table, no matter what language tag was set, for any given code 
point in a variant mapping cluster, its variants must be configured to 
either “allocatable” or “blocked”, its variants cannot stay as an 
INDEPENDENT code point, regardless of the fact that in Japanese language 
environmentthey are treated as different OLD form and NEW form.


It means that if anybody registers the label .一一 for the first time 
under the und-Jpan tag, then nobody can register the label .弌弌under 
any tag. If they had first registered the label .弌弌under the und-Hani 
tag, then the same applicant can request to register the label.一一as 
well (but whether that request is granted, and how, is outside the scope 
of the LGR).


Moreover, only the allocatable code points can be used to generate valid 
whole label package, and this whole label package will go (be allocated) 
to the SAME applicant, which means, the co-existence of old form label 
registrant and new form label registrant will not happen at Root level.

*
*

if it is felt desirable to allow somebody to register the old form and 
the new form under the "und-Jpan" tag, then the only way to do that is 
to declare these as "allocatable" variants under the und-Jpan tag.

Because the root is a shared resource, variants must be tightly coupled.
A./ Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the 
Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/neobrahmigp/attachments/20141027/61aa042d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
lgr mailing list
lgr at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lgr