[Neobrahmigp] [lgr] RootLGR questions
yoshiro.yoneya at jprs.co.jp
Fri Nov 14 06:57:39 UTC 2014
Thank you for your explanation. I also talked with Marc-san about
why not ASCII mixing.
I personally understood IP's opinion and thought rational. Perhaps
most of Japanese TLD applicant will not apply string mixed with
Japanese and ASCII. But, on the other hand, there will be an argument
that what is the criteria to overcome the bar for making exception.
RFC 6192 doesn't prohibit mixed script explicitly. B.3.2 of procedure
document also doesn't provide criteria for permitting mixed script
explicitly. It is very appreciated if IP declared that ASCII mixing is
permitted only for Latin script. It is very hard to persuade Japanese
community without external evidence.
My aplogize for difficult request.
Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya at jprs.co.jp>
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:18:40 -0800 Asmus Freytag <asmusf at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> On 11/11/2014 1:16 PM, Yoshiro YONEYA wrote:
> > Asmus-san,
> >> Just out of interest, can you give me an example of a label
> >> where jpan+latn needs to be mixed?
> > Followings are existing Japanese JP domain names including Alphabets.
> > JR東日本.jp
> > 日本IBM.jp
> > 株式会社NTTドコモ.jp
> > Some companies are using such mixed script name. I'm not sure if
> > they want to register such name on TLD, but I don't have reason
> > to prohibit it.
> > I'll reply to your answer to my 2nd question separately.
> > Regards,
> The text in B.3.2 of the Procedure anticipates only two cases where
> script-mixing is allowed. They are: a) mixing of Common/Inherited
> with certain scripts, and b) the mixture of East Asian scripts such as t
> the Hiragana+Katakana+Kanji trio for "und-Jpan". Beyond that,
> including the common "usage" of mixing ASCII in various cultures,
> no mixing is anticipated. This describes the default position.
> The Integration Panel is aware of the Japanese practices using
> Romaji, but is not taking an action towards making an exception for
> this. The bar for the IP panel to make any exception to the status quo
> on script mixing suggested in the procedure would be very high.
> The absence of such an exception does make the root more restrictive
> than second level domains; it also affects other cultures' more
> occasional use of ASCII letters. However, the restriction of not
> allowing digits in the roots affects some writing systems already more
> severely than the absence of ASCII mixing (disallowing plurals, for
> example). Overall, this restrictiveness is built firmly into the
> suggested course of action by the Procedure and and in turn aligned
> with the
> provision in RFC 6912 that zones higher in the DNS tree tend to have
> more restrictive rules.
> That is the best I can do at this point to give you more background
> on my short reply during the ICANN51 meeting.
> Perhaps you get further understanding of this by discussing it with
> Marc Blanchet, who, I believe is at the same IETF meeting with you.
lgr mailing list
lgr at icann.org
More information about the Neobrahmigp