RE: [jig] SSAC report on Single Character IDN TLDs

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

Patrik,

I do not understand why a one character string would have separate rules for 
character confusion.  Since the strings are evaluated absent of language then 
it is merely an identifier which single characters would also be.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:patrik@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 2:46 AM
> To: edmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Gomes, Chuck; 'Julie Hedlund'; 'jig'
> Subject: Re: [jig] SSAC report on Single Character IDN TLDs
> 
> On 3 feb 2012, at 18:55, Edmon Chung wrote:
> 
> > Yes, I think we are probably saying pretty much the same thing too.
> The subtle, and critical difference is perhaps whether the excuse for
> ICANN to withhold/discriminate single character IDN TLD implementation
> is appropriate.
> 
> What SSAC says is that the rules for what codepoints are what I think
> you call "easy" and "hard" does not exist, and they must exist before
> single character TLDs are accepted.
> 
> > The same logic if applied would result in ICANN not being able to
> identify what is a 2 character string (and so on).  i.e. if one cannot
> determine whether a string is 1 character long, how can one determine
> whether a string is 2 characters long, and so on.
> 
> No, because specific rules exists for 2 character labels.
> 
> > To illustrate the point:
> > - if one cannot determine whether "o" should be considered confusing
> with "0"
> > - neither can one determine whether "oo" should be considered
> confusing with "00"
> 
> Wrong, rules exists for the 2nd of the two.
> 
>    Patrik