Re: IRIs and bidirectional formatting characters

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote:
> This was a (perhaps "the") main sticking point for IRI and it's thorny: there is no obvious solution for all use cases, just sets of compromises or potential things we could try to enforce.

I added something to this effect to the standard:

  https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-rendering
  https://github.com/whatwg/url/commit/d1152b94a16ae91e1f72d128fd5ef589635f0e7c


>> I'm not sure URL detection within a string of text is a worthwhile
>> standardization topic, but I suppose we could mention it and some of its
>> pitfalls.

I decided against mentioning this for now. If it keeps coming up, I
can add a section.


On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:39 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 04:18:23PM +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Even ASCII, right? rn vs m et al.
>
> I think that's oversimplifying.  In the case of rn vs. m and so on,
> with a clear font and sufficient size it is at least possible to see
> the difference.  With formatting characters, it is not possible _by
> definition_ to see them, any more than control characters and so on.

That is a good point. In the above commit I attempted to address this,
but mentioning one such case.


> There's no question that IRIs are a mess in this aspect, and the topic
> is not getting improved by the fairly low engagement around the IETF
> of people worried about i18n.  It could use some help in this area,
> actually, so if anyone has any spare cycles (ha!) I have some mailing
> lists to suggest.

If you think there's anything else worth mentioning I would encourage
you to file issues here:

  https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/new


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/

Received on Wednesday, 26 August 2015 11:26:49 UTC