[UA-discuss] Document Review: UASG011 Frequently Asked Questions

[Tex]

Roberto,

 

Good point. There could be a question added such as where do applications typically fail UA compliance-

And  we can then list character support and TLD length in domain names, and international characters in the local portion of email addresses as well as their maximum length and other issues as needed, including a link to a document describing the requirements in detail.

I think that will help the FAQ quite a bit.

 

tex

 

 

From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 12:10 AM
To: Tex
Cc: Don Hollander; Universal Acceptance
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Document Review: UASG011 Frequently Asked Questions

 

I will go again through all docs over the weekend, but have one first comment. 

I fully agree that the bulk of the UA work - and probably the hardest part - is about non-ASCII scripts, but maybe we should also mention problems that manifest themselves for ASCII email addresses and domain names. To name one, in some applications TLDs that are longer than 3 chars are still rejected, in spite of the long time since the first introduction of some of them in 2000. This aspect is missing in the FAQ when we seem to imply that the only benefit will be for support of non-ASCII scripts.

Cheers,

Roberto

 





On 01.03.2019, at 00:01, Tex <textexin at xencraft.com> wrote:

 

Don, thanks for asking.

 

I think we can do much better than that document.

Besides being redundant in several places, it asks questions which it then does not answer. For example, it asks about disadvantages and then offers advantages.

It uses UA-ready without defining it.

 

It often talks about expanding the internet, which I think for most readers is  of no consequence (not my job).

On the other hand it buries the more significant argument which is the enablement of users that are not English or ASCII literate.

 

It is also rather geeky in describing UA as a “technical compliance process”, rather than using more approachable language.

 

Asking about which companies are UA-ready seems inappropriate since the large companies mentioned will almost never be fully UA-ready, as they have so many applications.

It would be better to identify software systems they offer that we can say are UA-ready. 

 

We should use links everywhere we mention a document rather than pointing at the containing directory.

 

Rather than listing companies that are members, we should have a link to the list of members. That way the document doesn’t need to be updated as the list changes and it might encourage others to join.

 

So fwiw, I would replace the faq with something like the attached. I tried to be more direct, more approachable, and have more compelling arguments.

The contents I removed, I did so intentionally. (Apologies if I removed someone’s favorite item.)

 

Feel free to disagree or dismiss outright.

It might benefit from a few statistics – eg number of TLDs in each language or script, and some examples of important cases. (China, India, etc. with large markets, etc.)

 

I hope that helps.

tex

 

 

 

 

From: UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Don Hollander
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 3:59 PM
To: ua-discuss at icann.org
Subject: [UA-discuss] Document Review: UASG011 Frequently Asked Questions

 

We have this FAQ published at  <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/UASG011-160823-en-faq-digital.pdf> https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/UASG011-160823-en-faq-digital.pdf

 

I’d very much welcome comments from the community about this – whether you think it’s fine as it is or whether things have progressed since we last updated this in 2016 or whether there are fresh questions that should be included.

 

If you need a deadline, let’s aim for the 5th of March.

 

Don

 

 

 

Don Hollander

Secretary General – UASG

Skype: Don_Hollander

 

<UASG011 Universal Acceptance-tex.pdf>

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ua-discuss/attachments/20190301/b15ef14b/attachment.html>