Re: [ietf-provreg] Re: EPP Extensions for IDN

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

If we have native Ukrainian or Russian speakers on this list, it would
be of help. I read cyrillic, and still can speak a little.

Please beware that there are differences between cyrillic used in Russian
and a cyrillic used in Ukrainian.
There is no latin shape letter "i" in Russian (the sound "i" writes "u"
in Russian cyrillic), while that letter does exist in Ukrainian cyrillic.

Look for the name of Lviv in the URL http://www.ipk.polynet.lviv.ua/lviv/
ans its Ukrainian cyrillic just right to the city arms, word after Micto ...
(you spell Micto - misto - city) -- you see letter "i" (you spell it "i"),
between two "B" (spelled "v").

What I want to say it is just impossible in my view to separate
Latin and Cyrillic. As far as I know the similar mixtures are common
in Bielorus as well.

I would not like to forbid ".Lviv" in Ukrainian cyrillic, just because
it is against theory of not mixing scripts.

Kind regards,
Elisabeth Porteneuve

--

> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:58:42 -0400
> From: Andrew Sullivan <andrew@ca.afilias.info>
> 
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 10:49:28AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> 
> > Right and another example (may be more realistic) is company names in
> > Russia where high-tech organisations sometimes have a name where a
> > Latin-script acronym ("xml" for instance) is mixed with a
> > Cyrillic-script name.
> 
> Yes, that is in fact a bigger concern.  The artificial example I gave
> is actually ruled out by the ICANN guidelines at the moment, I think:
> 
>    3. (a) In implementing the IDN standards, top-level domain
>       registries will associate each label in a registered
>       internationalized domain name, as it appears in their registry
>       with a single script This restriction is intended to limit the
>       set of permitted characters within a label.
> 
> The problem arises exactly as you say, when you have a name for
> something (which is presumably a desired label) which cannot be
> expressed in a single script.  My guess is that this state of affairs
> is what the exception is there to deal with:
> 
>       Alternatively, a label may be associated with a set of
>       languages, or with more than one designator under the conditions
>       described below.
> 
> This is sort of a policy issue, though, and since I guess we're not in
> the business of telling registries what policies they should adopt,
> that's probably out of scope. 
> 
> > May be using RFC 4646 for the tag would be the easier way to support both?
> 
> That seems like the best idea to me, yes.  
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
> Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
> <andrew@ca.afilias.info>                              M2P 2A8
> jabber: ajsaf@jabber.org                 +1 416 646 3304 x4110
> 
>