Re: [gnso-idn-wg] One comment on techno-policy details

["Chun Eung Hwi" <ehchun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Bruce and all,

In my prior reply to Olof Nordling's comment, I have kept this in my mind.
This is very typical "confusingly similar" case which could happen in
punycode encoded ascii strings. And I think this case could also be largely
categorized as "typographical similarity". So, we may say that in ascii or
non-ascii labels or across different language script labels, "typographical
similarity" should be avoided.

But in any event, this is not to say that one script label in one language
would have any ""ex ante rights" with similarities to the "confusingly
similar" test".


regards,

Chun


2007/2/7, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hello Mawaki,
>
> It would be useful to give some practical examples here.  Ie strings that
> you would or would not consider confusingly similar across different
> scripts.
>
> Part of the issue here is that it depends to some degree on how the ASCII
> domain name string is displayed in an application.  At the DNS level it is
> all just ascii.
>
> For example is:
>
> xn--bruce.example confusingly similar to bruce.example
>
> At the raw ascii level I would probably say no - ie the "xn--" provides
> sufficient differentiation, others may say that they are too similar.
>
> When you then render "xn--bruce" in an application you might get:
>
> ??抉.example which looks nothing like bruce.example
>
> Applications may or may not limit the set of scripts that can be used.  So
> for example this email application I am using allows me to mix scripts.
>
> I think the assumption so far is that where two scripts that can appear
> together in the same application at the 1st level would look the same then
> they could fall into the confusingly similar category.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce


--
---------------------
Chun Eung Hwi
General Secretary, PeaceNet Korea
chun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
pcs (+82) 19-259-2667
fax (+82)  2-2649-2624