Cc:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
Budi Rahardjo <budi@alliance.globalnetlink.com>
Date:
Thu, 8 Aug 2002 17:59:44 +0700
Content-Disposition:
inline
In-Reply-To:
<200208080811.KAA19939@balsa.cetp.ipsl.fr>; from Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr on Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 10:11:32AM +0200
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mutt/1.2.5i
Subject:
Re: Sending the original (Unicode) domain name as well as the ACE ?
On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 10:11:32AM +0200, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote: ... > The nature of a postal address is that is might be used to send > a _paper_ letter. Then a person in, say Italy, will have to write > it on a paper and post to, say Korea. Hi Elisabeth, I understand what you're saying. You are correct if a person in Korea wants to communicate with a person in Italy (or vice versa). But, it doesn't have to be that way for a person in Korea who wants to communicate with another person in Korea. S/he may not really care about other people in other parts of the world. Perhaps a similar situation may also happen in China, Taiwan, Arabic countries, and so on. It doesn't make sense to *force* them to use our alphabet if they just want to communicate internally, does it? > We do not speak here about content of letters, or content of websites. No, I am not talking the content of a letter. I am thinking of the address. In China, Taiwan, Japan, etc... they can write the *address* with their own characters on the envelope, can't they? Or do they *have* to write in "our" alphanumeric characters? ;-) Of course, the letters may not make sense to us, but it is not intended to us anyway. > The intent of my message was to recall that LDH used in postal address > is not to prevent people to communicate, neither to dominate them, > but exactly the opposite, to permit international communication happen. As long as it does not *force* people to do one way. They know that using their own characters may restrict international communication, but that's their choice. We shouldn't ram it down to their throats ;-) (figure of speach of course) I hope my explanation is clear. Or ... create more confusion, as usual... Regards -- budi