RE: [ga] On Its Way: One of the Biggest Changes to the Internet

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andy,

Whether they are demanding it or not, the GNSO IDN WG defintitely recommended 
variant control and I believe the ccNSO would advocate the same, so I think we 
will see that.  Also, the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans worked pretty closely 
together in this area, which is understandable because they have some common 
characters.

Chuck Gomes
 
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it 
is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and 
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, 
distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the 
original transmission." 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Gardner
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 6:18 PM
> To: ga DNSO
> Subject: Re: [ga] On Its Way: One of the Biggest Changes to 
> the Internet
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 11, 2007, at 4:52 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
> > I was waiting for clarification of a couple questions I had.  I can 
> > tell you that we do offer registrations at the second level in both 
> > traditional and simplified Chinese, but they are not referred to as 
> > variants.  In both scripts we use variant tables provided by the 
> > Chinese community to control variants.
> >
> 
> The obvious question then is if the Chinese community wanted 
> variant control, why are they not insisting on it at the TLD level?
> 
> And if the TLD test DOES work fine with both simplified and 
> traditional variants of "test" running, why are they 
> insisting on variant control at all?
> 
> It's always made me wonder why if HSBC registers ?R?S?y行.com to 
> service their customer in Hong Kong, the Chinese community 
> deems it necessary to not allow them to register 汇丰银行.com 
> also, to the detriment of their customers in Shanghai.
> 
> And why the same rule prevents 中国.com (China in Chinese) to 
> be registered, because someone else registered it in Japanese first.
> 
> Don't make sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>