[UA-discuss] More from Ram Mohan on ICANN's further commitment to Universal Acceptance
John Levine
john.levine at standcore.com
Thu Dec 27 01:30:04 UTC 2018
> I think the "language" issue is a bit of a red herring.
>
> When traveling, things like google searches, weather forecasts and many other
> services are re-routed to the local service who then impose their local
> language (and metric) preferences on me by default. All without IDNs.
Indeed, but I would think that multiple IDN names for a web site would
imply multiple languages. If they all just redirect to the English
language site, that's technically easy, but it also seems like a cruel
joke.
>> Same answer, except that if one name isn't a subdomain of the other,
>> the login and option cookie problems are a lot harder.
>
> Airline sites that direct to local access (with domain in local ccTLD) would
> have that issue and appear to be able to handle it. Other services do as well
> - not always without some bumps.
Having done this a few times, my experience is that they generally all
redirect to the same site, and there's a button at the top to pick a
language, which is usually remembered in a cookie, maybe initialized with
a guess from the original name but usually not. Again, one could do that
with multiple IDN names, but why bother?
> The main difference is that crossing script boundaries makes it impossible
> for users not native (or competent) in both scripts to relate your aliased
> names. (Within a script my suspicion is that you wouldn't normally translate
> domain names without leaving at least a recognizable part, like a
> language-neutral brand name or abbreviation).
Seems reasonable.
>> definitely tell you that without loose address matching that matches
>> user expectations, whatever they are, your customers will hate you and
>> decide that your system is unusable.
>
> Totally.
>
> My point was intended to be helpful in pointing out where you might find data
> to extend loose matching.
I've been wondering if it's worth spinning up an IRTF group to try and
collect advice on loose matching and (sort of its inverse) son-of-PRECIS
assigning user names that allow characters that users expect, but that
won't collide with variants or if non-speakers misenter them as homographs
or near homographs.
Regards,
John Levine, john.levine at standcore.com
Standcore LLC
More information about the UA-discuss
mailing list