Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Actions/Discussion Points: 10 May Meeting
- To: Jiankang YAO <yaojk@xxxxxxxx>, Ird <ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Actions/Discussion Points: 10 May Meeting
- From: Steve Sheng <steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 11:21:00 -0700
Hi Jiankang and all,
Good point! I would think usage by regular users should be one of the primary
reasons we discuss about different models. If we think from the user's
perspective, transliteration would be of limited use for them. Translation is
the best in this case, but it is expensive. Any middle ground we can think of?
On 5/19/10 3:00 AM, "Jiankang YAO" <yaojk@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Edmon noted that a more important question to address is what will the
>purpose or use of the transliterated information. He emphasized that if we
>determine who will use the information then we could decide how the
I agree with Edmon that we should know that who will be the customers of the
we should know why we do it and any benefits.
If the customers are the public users, I think that many user will not know the
other language's transliterated information.
for example, I am chinese and know chinese and english, If i check some domain
name information registered in Arabic characters
in Sadi Arab and the domain names whois information are transliterated, I
don't know Arabic and the transliterated information.
so this transliterated information is no use to me.
the persontage of people who know english is larger than the persontage of
people who know the transliterated information of other language instead of
if the customers are the big organziations such as FBI, the transliterated
information is useful to them because they have enough resource to decode the
transliterated information. of course, even the domain name information is not
the transliterated information, they can also decode it.
if doing it without customers oriented, we may fall in "do it just because we
want to do it " even the ascii transliterated information is no use to most of
----- Original Message -----
From: Julie Hedlund <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 11:22 PM
Subject: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Actions/Discussion Points: 10 May Meeting
Dear IRD-WG members,
Below and in the attached document are the action items and main discussion
points for the 10 May 2010 meeting of the IRD-WG. These also are on the wiki
Please let me know if you have any changes or questions.
Our next meeting is scheduled for Monday, 24 May at 1900 UTC, 12:00 PDT, 15:00
EDT, 20:00 London, 21:00 CEST, 03:00 Beijing, 04:00 Kyoto, 07:00 NZDT (Tues
Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support
IRD-WG Meeting: 10 May 2010 at 1400 UTC
Attendees: Edmon Chung, Rafik Dammak, Jim Galvin, Jeremy Hitchcock, and Bob
Hutchinson; from staff: Julie Hedlund, Dave Piscitello, and Steve Sheng.
Action Items: 1) Staff will outline a Model 4 along the lines suggested by Jim
Galvin with assistance from Jim; 2) Staff will develop a draft preliminary
approach for Working Group consideration as a basis for a Public Forum in
Discussion Summary: See attached file.