Dear Ben and Adam, Thanks for your suggestion. This could be one option for Han users. I've proposed phased implementation for IDNA, that would be another compromise.
Cheers Kenny Huang > -----Original Message----- > From: ben [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 10:46 PM > To: IETF idn working group; Kenny Huang > Subject: Re: [idn] Re: peanut gallery > > > Hi Kenny, > > > > > That might prohibit a few characters unnecessarily, but it will make > > sure that Taiwan, Japan, and Korea are able to use all their > characters, > > and will leave the maximum flexibility for China & Singapore to > define > > how to fold the remaining characters if they decide that's what they > > want to do. > > > > I wouldn't recommend this course, but if most of the Chinese > community > > wanted to do this, I don't see why the rest of us should object. > > > > Adam's suggestion seems like a resonable compromise (but even more > important, a *do-able* compromise). It will allow our friends in the > Chinese community as much time as it needs to come up with a TC<->SC > solution and yet still allow IDN to move forward as the majority of > this WG wants. > > Please let me know what you think? > > Thanks, > Ben > >
