[governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
Tue Nov 1 09:29:15 EDT 2011
Pardon the typos and the bad grammar, this was sent at 3am. Apologies.
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear George and others,
>
> The relevance of IDNs to Internet Governance are in the "*multilingualism*"
> policy category that was defined in the WGIG 2005 document.
>
> I was going through the archives and found your email. You may be
> interested in reading the Study Reports on the various variants, they are
> open for comments and submissions, see:
>
> I listened to certain speakers speak about IDN variants which are so very
> exciting and interesting. You can access and view their study reports via
> http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ The Cyrillic variant report is
> open for comments until 16th November, 2011. Other variant reports are also
> there (Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Latin etc). If you want to get submissions
> in and quick, now is the time! :)
>
> It is so interesting to see how certain scripts are politically charged,
> the similarity in phonetics or confusingly similar script. Whilst IDNs have
> been around for some time, I am sensing that it will only accelerate in its
> prominence in the not too distant future.
>
> The existing ITU model has closed memberships and this is true even for
> the Dedicated Working Group on International Internet Related Public Policy
> issues. This is a *closed group* I might add. Is there anyone on this
> list that is a member of this group I would be interested to ask some
> policy questions on the subject matter and we can discuss offlist.
>
> I am on record for asking At Large whether there is some level of
> interface between ICANN and this Dedicated Working Group. This Dedicated
> Working Group was established under Resolution 75. Membership is only
> exclusive for member states and the current chair is Mr Majed Al Mazyed
> from Saudi Arabia.
>
> Resolution 133 deals from the ITU Plenipotentiary deals with the role of
> administrations of member states in the management of internationalized(multilingual)
> domain names. [see
> http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/intgov/resoultions_2010/PP-10/RESOLUTION_133.pdf
> ]
>
> I should also state that the 2009 Council Resolution 1305 [which we are
> denied access unless you are a member state invited Member States to
> recognise the scope of the work of ITU on international Internet-related
> public policy matters.] I will say that the approach of the ITU to close
> discussions on internet policy and limit it to member states is worrying.
> 2012 will be a critical year within the ITU as they will be revising alot
> of resolutions and positions etc to "make it more relevant".
>
> I am not in anyway criticising ITU and have *great respect* for the
> degree of capacity building and recognise the role that they play but I
> strongly disagree with the policy exclusionary development processes within
> the ITU. The ICC also publicly in 2005 issued a Statement to tell ITU about
> what it thought of ITU's role in the development of global internet
> policies and think that the statement would be available on the ICC website.
>
> There are some who have been vocal of wanting to see more efficient policy
> processes and are debating what enhanced cooperation.
>
> As civil society how can the voice of consumers be represented or at least
> other critical stakeholders within policy development space? I think that
> these are legitimate questions that require consideration.
>
> I would also be interested to learn from other individuals or
> organisations that deal with IDN other than the ITU Dedicated Working Group
> and ICANN. If you can point me to URLs, that would be great.
>
> I am also aware of the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the
> management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public
> interest (see:
> https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1678299&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383
> )
>
> Tobias Mahler who is on this list had raised issues with s.9 of this
> Declaration on another list.
>
> It will be great to see all those working on these policies to share
> resources and information, so that at the end of the day, consumer
> interests and end users are protected.*
> *
>
> I was wondering whether civil society or individual members would like to
> put in submissions, then they are at liberty to do so.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sala
>
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 4:41 AM, George Todoroff <george_todoroff at imap.cc>wrote:
>
>> Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>> Bulgaria has proposed for an IDN ccTLD the string .бг (Cyrillic
>> for .bg, or U+0431 U+0433), but the proposal was turned down by
>> the ICANN DNS Stability panel in May 2010 without any arguments
>> or an option for appeal.
>>
>> The proposed string is composed of two characters:
>> U+0431 CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER BE (б) and
>> U+0433 CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER GHE (г)
>>
>> Reading the tables, provided with Unicode Technical Standard
>> #39,
>> (
>> http://www.unicode.org/Public/security/revision-04/confusables.txt)
>> I see that confusable characters are only:
>>
>> 0431 ; 0036 ; SL # ( б → 6 ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER BE → DIGIT SIX
>> #
>>
>> 0433 ; 0072 ; ML # ( г → r ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER GHE → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER R #
>>
>> As a result, we see that the applied string .бг could be
>> confused only with the string .6r, which does not exist.
>>
>> The Russian case
>>
>> Opponents to the Bulgarian proposal say that Russia first wanted
>> to apply for .ру (Cyrillic for .ru), but then selected another
>> one, because .ру was found to be confusingly similar with the
>> Paraguayan ccTLD .py , and because of this, Bulgaria must be
>> obedient and select another IDN string.
>>
>> Looking again at Unicode Technical Standard #39, I see that:
>>
>> 0440 ; 0070 ; ML # ( р → p ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ER → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER P #
>>
>> 0443 ; 0079 ; ML # ( у → y ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER U → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER Y #
>>
>> We have absolute similarity here! Very different than the
>> Bulgarian case with 50% similarity.
>>
>> Russia selected and received the .рф (Cyrillic for .rf) string.
>> Looking for a third time at Unicode Technical Standard #39, I
>> see that:
>>
>> 0440 ; 0070 ; MA # ( р → p ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ER → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER P #
>>
>> 0444 ; 0278 ; ML # ( ф → ɸ ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER EF → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER PHI#
>>
>> What do we have here? One similar character, and one not similar
>> to a Latin basic character. So, how is this different from the
>> Bulgarian case? Its the same! How the Russian string was
>> approved, and the Bulgarian – not???
>>
>>
>> The DNS Stability panel rankings
>>
>> [6] Both characters are visually identical to an ISO 646 Basic Version
>> (ISO 646-BV) character.
>> [5] One character is visually identical to, and one character is
>> visually confusable with, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [4] Both characters are visually confusable with, but neither character
>> is visually identical to, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [3] One character is visually distinct from, and one character is
>> visually identical to, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [2] One character is visually distinct from, and one character is
>> visually confusable with, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [1] Both characters are visually distinct from an ISO 646-BV character.
>>
>> The panel said that Bulgaria fails under [4] or [5], so the
>> string is not accepted, because rank [4] or more is not good.
>>
>> But, from my findings here, the Bulgarian (as the Russian)
>> strings fail under [2] or [3], and its perfectly fine to be
>> approved.
>>
>> Security proposals
>>
>> As another participant in the public comment forum said, two
>> security proposals must be implemented:
>>
>> “1. All names in the .бг (.bg) IDN ccTLD must be registered only
>> with Cyrillic letters.”
>> “2. All names in the .бг (.bg) IDN ccTLD must contain at least
>> one letter, which can be visually distinguished from the Latin
>> alphabet (one of the letters: б, г, д, ж, и, й, л, п, ф, ц, ч,
>> ш, щ, ъ, ь, ю, я).” (“г“ may fail off this list, because of my
>> findings.)
>>
>> Examples
>>
>> There must be really conservative people in the DNS Stability
>> panel, who don`t like seeing domains like:
>> - раурал.бг because people would confuse it with paypal.br
>> Come on, раурал.бг and paypal.br ? Compare with paypal.it and
>> paypal.lt ?
>>
>> Others are afraid of seeing:
>> - руса.бг and pyca.br (whatever this means in Brazilian Portuguese) -
>> check the second security proposal. The first domain can`t exist.
>>
>> - - - - -
>>
>> Dear DNS Stability panel members, what is wrong here?
>> Dear ICANN Board members, Bulgaria needs an appeal procedure!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> George Todoroff
>> --
>> george_todoroff at imap.cc
>>
>> --
>> http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>
>> For all list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>
--
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/6bc69f56/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list