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

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

Dear Will Rodger and all,


2007/2/7, Will Rodger <wrodger@xxxxxxxxx>:
> But do they?
>
> If I hear ".com" and ".kom" (think cyrillic script, for instance, here)
> am I not likely going to think the two are related, or the same? If I
> pronounce two TLds the same, won't the average user think one is a
> "translation" (common use of the term here, not the jargon we use on
> list) of the other?


In my view, this example is also likely to be much more the
typographical similarity.
And if typographical similarity may not be counted even though phonetic
similarity is found, it would not be a problem because in usual talking
environment, we will tell those words adding up "in this language script or
in that language script"


I think the potential for consumer confusion is really big, too big to
> be ignored.  I'd go further -- the fact that we have to use words like
> "homographic" shows just how confusing the whole matter is.


I agree to the importance of consumer confusion, but my argument is that
only typographical similarity should be avoided particularly in
cross-scripts situation. And I understand that homographic problem is
essentially graphical confusion issue.


regards,

Chun




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