Q1 is mapping on lookup permanent or transitional?

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

Rémy,

Would you be so kind as to provide your original text, in French of 
course, in addition to the mechanical translation? I suspect that we'd 
be better off discussing issues stated in French, in French, rather than 
attempting to discuss issues mechanically translated to "English", in 
English.

Eric


Rémy Renardin wrote:
> Dear Vint,
> Just an interesting clarification to Louis' last mail.
>
> I did not understand the first position he listed. He talks of the 
> "French script" in his French text (including the proper support of 
> majuscules and accents in capitals) and of "English writing" in his 
> English text. Until I realized he wrote his French text and pasted its 
> Google translation.
>
> Actually if you enter in Google Translation the French sentence "un 
> support correct de l'écriture française n'est pas à l'ordre du jour" 
> which means "a correct support of the French script is not on the 
> agenda", Google translates it as "a correct English writing is not on 
> the agenda".
>
> (This was checked one minute ago, not on April 1st).
> This shows that multilinguistics is not an easy discipline....
>
> Rémy Renardin
>
> 2009/4/4 LB <lbleriot at gmail.com <mailto:lbleriot at gmail.com>>
>
>     2009/4/4 Vint Cerf <vint at google.com <mailto:vint at google.com>>:
>     > we are NOT going to discuss ML-DNS or JFC proposals in this
>     mailing list.
>     > If you persist in posting on these topics I will have to declare
>     your
>     > postings off topic and have your posting privileges removed.
>     > vint cerf
>
>     Dear Mr. Cerf,
>     it seems that you do not understand Rémy. Since you have decided
>     to ban JFC, we are very active within the francophone
>     multilinguistic, as we prepare for our second conference. We have
>     been on skype all Saturday morning.
>
>     We are also very hostile because the economic impact on us of your
>     position is very important negative effect, and you know it.
>
>     There are four positions that have emerged:
>
>     1. like you: a proper English writing is not on the agenda and
>     talk is banned.
>
>     2. Klensin as: can we solve the problem with IDNA2008 (or keep
>     IDNA2003)? It was originally the position of Rémy. But this seems
>     impossible because of all the ways you do not want to.
>
>     3. the position of a parallel root like China: I support this
>     approach because it seems distributed in accordance with the
>     nature of the world and the spirit of WSIS, and we worked on it
>     for years. But I want to avoid balkanization. I am therefore
>     opposed to the conflicts of principle and people. And I want to
>     know if the virtual root gives a real solution. And where is ICANN
>     and its marketing of naming.
>
>     4. JFC's proposal: a paradigm shift. A different perspective of
>     the same things, including IDNA2008, which shows that the problems
>     are false problems. Our embarrassment is that this is a general
>     solidification DNS case and protects all its uses.
>
>     We are currently compiling all the problems discussed by the WG
>     and our exploration of addressing semantics and see how each of
>     these four options, solves.
>
>     Our attitude is simple: as long as possible we will be transparent
>     to the list WG-IDNABIS. If we banned it will mean that you decide
>     that my only solution and the JFC can solve the problem of writing
>     French.
>
>
>     French text given to Google Translation
>
>     2009/4/4 Vint Cerf <vint at google.com <mailto:vint at google.com>>:
>
>     > we are NOT going to discuss ML-DNS or JFC proposals in this
>     mailing list.
>     > If you persist in posting on these topics I will have to declare
>     your
>     > postings off topic and have your posting privileges removed.
>     > vint cerf
>
>     Cher M. Cerf,
>     il semble que vous ne comprenez pas Rémy. Depuis que vous avez
>     décidé de bannir JFC, nous sommes très actifs au sein de la
>     multilinguistique francophone, alors que nous préparons aussi
>     notre deuxième congrès. Nous avons été sur skype tout ce samedi
>     matin.
>
>     Nous vous sommes aussi très hostiles car l'impact économique sur
>     nous de votre position est négativement très important, et vous le
>     savez bien.
>
>     Il y a quatre positions qui se dégagent:
>
>     1. comme vous : un support correct de l'écriture française n'est
>     pas à l'ordre du jour et qui en parle est banni.
>
>     2. comme Klensin : peut-on résoudre le problème avec IDNA2008 (ou
>     garder IDNA2003) ? C'était au départ la position de Rémy. Mais
>     cela semble impossible car de toutes les façons vous ne le voulez pas.
>
>     3. la position d'une racine parallèle comme la Chine : je supporte
>     cette approche car elle me parait distribuée, en accord avec la
>     nature du monde et l'esprit du SMSI, et nous avons travaillé
>     dessus depuis des années. Mais je veux éviter la balkanisation. Je
>     m'oppose donc aux conflits de principe et de personnes. Et je veux
>     savoir si la racine virtuelle donne vraiment une solution. Et où
>     sera l'ICANN et sa commercialisation du nommage.
>
>     4. la proposition de JFC : un changement de paradigme. Une
>     perspective différente des mêmes choses, y compris de IDNA2008,
>     qui montrerait que les problèmes qui se posent sont des faux
>     problèmes. Notre embarras est que cette position est une
>     solidification générale du DNS qui concerne et protège tous ses
>     usages.
>
>     Nous en sommes pour l'instant à compiler tous les problèmes
>     discutés par ce WG et par notre exploration de l'adressage
>     sémantique et à voir comment chacune de ces quatre options le résoud.
>
>     Notre attitude est simple : tant que c'est possible nous serons
>     transparents à la liste WG-IDNABIS. Si nous en sommes bannis cela
>     signifiera que vous décidez que seules ma solution ou celle de JFC
>     peut résoudre le problème de l'écriture française.
>
>     Cheers.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>