I-D Action:draft-ietf-idnabis-mappings-00.txt

[Vint Cerf]

Folks,

this discussion is not going to get us closer to agreement on the  
remaining task: selection of the set of characters that should undergo  
some kind of mapping prior to lookup in the DNS.

Could I suggest that parties interested in this theoretical discussion  
move it to a private distribution list while the WG focuses on  
finalizing the mapping choices?

thanks

vint


On Jul 1, 2009, at 5:58 AM, Elisabeth Blanconil wrote:

> I understand this. But I am refering to entropy as "a loss of  
> information", as per Shannon and John. Now, I am not a mathematician  
> here: I am a semantician. This because we precisely reach here (and  
> this is the entire problem) the limits of mathematics. If we could  
> quantify the entropy we could restore the initial information in  
> restoring the corresponding negentropy.
>
> The problem we face is that mapping introduce a non quantifiable  
> entropy. We definitly enter mathematical chaos field through the  
> entropic succession which chains possible semantic misunderstandings.
>
> Varela (knowledge), Thom (mathematics), Cullioli (linguistics),  
> Morin (complex thinking), Von Bertalanffy (systems) etc. identify  
> linguistics, semantics and pragmatics as the most complex knowlege  
> field. Here we play with hortotypography with an impact on semantic  
> within different contexts. For those not familiar with chaos and  
> catastrophy theories or complex thinking this is like the Lorentz's  
> butterfly in Tokyo. You change a majuscule into a minuscule (French  
> orthotypography) or an upper case into a lower case (English  
> orthotypography) and you do not the global impact (it can be nill,  
> most probably it will change the world, cf. Chaitin and co.). This  
> is exactly the same as any other phishing: to make someone trust  
> what he should not.
>
> Elisabeth Blanconil
>
> 2009/7/1 Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net>
> Any phrasing is possible. Some mean less than others. One of my co- 
> workers was tempted to use "entropy" in a policy document recently.  
> I prefer not to use the word unless the "entropy" asserted to exist  
> can be stated as a mathematical formula. If you could make that  
> attempt, it would be helpful. Users deserve statements that purport  
> to "explain" which are factually correct.
>
> Eric
>
> Elisabeth Blanconil wrote:
> 2009/6/30 "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp <mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp 
> >>
>
>
>    A case mapping is also a 'loss of information', but one that
>    people clearly want.
>
>
> Could we not phrase this differently ? Case mapping may be  
> considered only if it does not represent a loss of information.  
> Otherwise should we not name it "case and entropy mapping" to  
> explain users where entropy occurs.
>
> Elisabeth Blanconil
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20090701/975c8b17/attachment.htm