Re: [soac-mapo] On "universal resolvability" and useful questions that emerged yesterday

[Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Milton,

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>  B:
>
> Thanks. A followup question:
>
> Is a TLD string in a language script I don’t understand “available” to me?
> E.g., are Arabic characters, which are completely meaningless and useless to
> me as a URL, “available” to me?
>
> --MM
>
>
>
> Some comments inline. But first, generally speaking, referring to your
> comment on technical misunderstanding : this is the reason why I believe
> that "universal availability" could be a better concept than "universal
> resolvability". You are right in your technical assessment and what I
> believe the GAC is concerned with is indeed the objective of universal
> availability (I do not think I misrepresent GAC members but I can be
> corrected).
>
>
>
> On the comments below, we may not agree, but this type of exchange is the
> very benefit of the processes we are involved in (they allow to understand
> better the perspectives of others). thanks for engaging.
>
>
>

Once again an excellent question. I would say : yes, it is "available", just
like addresses in latin characters that an arabic-only reader must use today
to access a page in arabic ;-) Technically, those TLDs will be available, ie
: they can lead you to a page if you click on the link or copy and paste
them in the address bar.

But what your question brings is a follow-up point : how do we deal with
strings in different scripts ? For instance, suppose an objection is filed
against a string in arabic or chinese because it is supposedly offensive to
the arabic or chinese community (or some portion thereof). According tot the
DAG, the procedure should be done in english; but should the panelists be
partially, or even totally from the arabic (resp. chinese) language space or
region ? Should people who do not read arabic or chinese be really concerned
or involved in the ultimate decision in the same manner as those who do ?
Could this lead to different standards of acceptance according to the
different script spaces ? If so, is it a good thing (facilitating the
accomodation of different cultural sensitivities) or a bad thing (different
standards and reference points depending upon the script that is used) ?

Important questions in my view, that point towards the emergence of script
spaces with somewhat differentiated but compatible and coordinated rules.

Best

Bertrand

-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
Information Society
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
and European Affairs
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")