- From: asmusf via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2016 15:24:41 +0000
- To: public-i18n-archive@w3.org
I find the transition from the previous sentence a bit jarring. "Regardless of script, any characters that are identical or 'confusable' in appearance can present spoofing and other security risks. For a discussion and examples of homoglyphs and confusability, see [UTS39]." For UTS39 perhaps the examples in the data file are at least as interesting as the text. Perhaps phrasing the reference a bit differently, as proposed above, can help sidestep the issue of whether this is considered 'definitive' in this context. -- GitHub Notification of comment by asmusf Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/charmod-norm/issues/87#issuecomment-206426014 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2016 15:24:43 UTC