Subject: [iucg] Fwd: AW: Mappings - some examples

From: Elisabeth Blanconil <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:31:50 +0100

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Elisabeth Blanconil <[email-masked]>
Date: 2009/12/2
Subject: Re: AW: Mappings - some examples
To: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Cc: Georg Ochsner <[email-masked]>, Alexander Mayrhofer <
[email-masked]>, Mark Davis ☕ <[email-masked]>, IDNA update
work <[email-masked]>, Andreas Stötzner <[email-masked]>,
Michael Everson <[email-masked]>

2009/12/2 Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>

Google already today "correct" my spellings in a way so that it is
> increasingly (yes, it is getting worse) hard to search for words that are
> correctly spelled in Swedish, but Google think it is a misspelling in
> English.
>
> I have wanted for some time an ability to turn off Googles "help" ;-)
>

oh! YES !!!!!

Patrik,

Same in French. One has to become a "LeGogoBingo" professional when one
really wants to use search engines. It is good training for semantic
addressing. LeGogoBingo's value added spelling makes it more and more
difficult to find something precise.

Now, the point we discuss today is to know if we want IDNA to be LeGogoBingo
(Vint, Harald, Keneth, Mark and Shawn) compatible. Keneth explained it would
now be too costly for them to "upgrade". We consensually said "no", so they
need to make us consensually say "yes". IMHO, they should really explain
their problem in basic technical requirements. Even it was biased to ask
engineers from Unicode, Vint wrote to an IBM engineer.

Anyway, we believe we did find a good solution (interplus). We start testing
it. However it will take time as we only are users, have no lab and budget,
speak another language (BTW this is probably why we MUST have a solution).
We, also, have other things to do in life. However we are no fool either:
engineers could come with other/better solution if they were clearly
explained technical requirements rather than to try to become hearsays
linguists. We have very good linguists among "Jefsey disciples" : we try to
make them think as users.

Elisabeth Blanconil.

---

From: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:36:09 +0100

Elisabeth Blanconil wrote:
> 2009/12/2 Patrik Fältström <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>>
> 
>     increasingly (yes, it is getting worse) hard to search for words
>     that are correctly spelled in Swedish, but Google think it is a
>     misspelling in English.
> 
> Now, the point we discuss today is to know if we want IDNA to be 
> LeGogoBingo (Vint, Harald, Keneth, Mark and Shawn) compatible.

One limitation results from the "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" 
type provided by HTML. User's input arrives to Google with no 
indication whatsoever about language and character set. (Googling for 
"iconv c3a4e284a2c2ae" one can find various explanation of a technique 
currently used to determine if the character set sent by the browser 
is UTF-8. No clue for the language, obviously.)

> Anyway, we believe we did find a good solution (interplus).

The other HTML form type, multipart/form-data, provides for header 
fields that might be used to specify the language. Since it is not 
urlencoded, it is primarily used with the POST method, and often only 
for forms that upload files. The situation looks similar for HTML5 
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/forms.html#attributes-for-form-submission

I'm unable to devise how on the Earth a server can make reliable 
assumptions about the language that a user submits, because I could 
google for "confounded déjoué"...

--
I came upon a wedding that old families had contrived;
Bethlehem the bridegroom,
Babylon the bride.
[L. Cohen, Last Year's Man]