From: linuxa linux (linuxalinux@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Mon Sep 29 2008 - 13:49:27 CDT
fyi
Regards
Meeku
http://twitter.com/nepotism
--- On Mon, 29/9/08, linuxa linux <linuxalinux@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> From: linuxa linux <linuxalinux@yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Proposal for .gb (great britain) suffix & alteration of the k alphabet in .uk
> To: bob.gilbert@nominet.org.uk, lesley.cowley@nominet.org.uk
> Cc: support@nominet.org.uk, nominet@nominet.org.uk
> Date: Monday, 29 September, 2008, 7:42 PM
> I wrote the below and presented it to Unicode.org and
> IETF.org. Based on this I would like to offer this proposal
> to Nominet.org.uk:
>
> (1) Create .gb (Great Britain) suffixes
> (2) Alter the k alphabet in .uk suffixes to क thus .uk
> alters to .uक
>
> This is a public campaign for replacing the k/K shape
> alphabets and thus I have put this action at
> http://www.twitter.com/nepotism
>
>
> ".....Due to the ASCII character encoding being the
> core/monopoly and primarily basis to the internet/web
> infrastructure that has become the conventional starting
> point for subsequent Unicode and Punycode character encoded
> internet/web, this has brought usability and integration
> problems for a truly multilingual internet/web because
> presently you cannot have domain names that are
> multilingual, for example: japanese and english language
> mixed character domain names, hindi and english language
> mixed character domain names etc.
>
> Another example, there is not much browser / URL bar
> integration and usability innovation that allow for a
> non-ASCII language domain name to stay non-ASCII script on
> the browser / URL bar without it changing to Punycode.
>
> Thus there is a basic underlying problem that can only be
> rectified when all the languages get represented on the
> internet/web infrastructure and not only ASCII character
> encoded languages. ASCII monopoly has not helped usability
> and integration for the internet/web and a Unicode approach
> is need. Unicode has accomplished things at the
> non-internet computer ground and now it needs to expand at
> the internet/web ground. Otherwise things are not equal
> between the ASCII and non-ASCII languages. For example you
> are seeing Punycode and not the non-ASCII script for
> non-ASCII domain names on the browser / URL bars -- a
> solution for this example here could perhaps be to have even
> ASCII based domain names to be also Punycoded as a standard
> not just non-ASCII based domain names to be Punycoded, thus
> bringing equality. When you get equality between the two
> then there will be browser / URL bar integration and
> usability innovation simultaneously between all the
> languages. I put this to Tina Dam at ICANN, the person
> handling these issues and Paul Twomey, the ICANN
> President/CEO and Pamela Miller at PIR the .ORG registry a
> few months ago however there was not much progress with
> them.....
>
> .....Fyi, I said to the ICANN-family that they was nepotism
> because they were not showing equality when it cam to the
> multilingual internet/web.....Why should ASCII based
> internet/web always be the primarily and conventional way
> for the internet/web? Non-ASCII languages should also
> become part of the internet/web infrastructure and
> Unicode.org and ICANN.org [and IETF.org] etc should make
> this a truly multilingual internet/web a reality.
>
> I now move to another topic and this is to ask the list if
> it is possible to get a different alphabet shape (and code
> point) on the english/european Unicode Table group/s that
> can allow the option to replace a particular
> english/european unicode alphabet at both upper and lower
> cases if the user / viewer wish? I can understand that
> there is not a precedent however would a public petition be
> the way? Please say what the requirements and procedures
> are? Also based upon this, please can someone say how ASCII
> can be altered also to accommodate this?.....
>
> .....Specifically I would like to discuss the 11th letter
> of the english/european language, please view this posting
> with UTF-8.
>
> I would like users and viewers the option not to use the k
> and K shaped letters of the english/european languages for
> their english/european language usages and instead use
> another alphabet, lower and upper case क.
>
> There is a BBT font that does this and I state how via what
> someone mentioned: "English font where the glyph
> representing the English "k"(Unicode 0x004B and
> 0x006B) has been replaced by a glyph representing the Hindi
> [I would say Devanagri] "ka"(0x0915)" [क].
>
>
> You can get the BBT font from here:
> http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/BBT/239
>
> The BBT font has both a lower and upper case equivalents
> for क. The lower case क is not on the Unicode Table and
> thus does not have a code point.
>
> Also when you use the unicode code point 0915 alphabet
> [क] on the internet/web, the output generated is not
> qualitatively exactly the same compared to what you see on
> the Unicode Table at Unicode.org, for example the left upper
> swirl on the devanagri alphabet क is not meeting the line,
> see http://www.geocities.com/linuxalinux/2325.html
> This becomes more visible the more you magnify the browser
> view.
>
> Then when you try to use the devanagri alphabet क with
> the other english/european alphabets on a website, the line
> spacing is not equal, see
> http://www.geocities.com/linuxalinux/testingk.html and this
> becomes more visible the more you magnify the browser view.
>
> Thus I would like to find out how a different alphabet
> (क) can be a given new code points and put on the
> english/european Unicode Table for usage by these languages?
> This is obviously new and there is not any precedent thus
> would a public petition will be the only way for it to be
> considered and justified?
>
>
> Other further information is available from:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXWRw0-zyYM
> http://Kalphabet.googlepages.com "
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Meeku
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 29 2008 - 13:52:53 CDT