[UA-discuss] GNSO requested deferral of IDN Guidelines 4.0 Vote - CPH / Registrants impact

[Ram Mohan]

I agree there's a large provisioning gap. My experience in China, Japan,
India, the Gulf states etc. is an inherent local belief that the internet
will follow real life in terms of use of scripts. And a lot of impatience
with technical reasons why it's not the most feasible thing.

On Mon, May 13, 2019, 12:08 PM John Levine <john.levine at standcore.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, 13 May 2019, Ram Mohan wrote:
> > While it's a straightforward argument to say no variants should be
> allowed
> > on the DNS, the reality in many linguistic locales is that variants are a
> > part of everyday life. Not just in the Han script, but in Indic and
> Arabic
> > scripts, among others. We can't wish them away, nor do we have the luxury
> > of saying the DNS wasn't designed for it, so it shall never support it.
>
> I think there's a large gap between "many writing systems can write the
> same thing in different ways" and "those different ways should be in the
> DNS."
>
> It's easy to see why you'd block variants, but particularly given the
> utter lack of tools to provision them, and no interest in creating those
> tools, hard to see why you'd delegate them.
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, john.levine at standcore.com
> Standcore LLC
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ua-discuss/attachments/20190513/249ce920/attachment.html>