- From: Jonathan Rosenne <rosennej@qsm.co.il>
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 11:50:58 +0200
- To: "'\"Martin J. D?rst\"'" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Cc: "'Shawn Steele'" <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, "'Larry Masinter'" <LMM@acm.org>, "'Slim Amamou'" <slim@alixsys.com>, <public-iri@w3.org>, "'Peter Constable'" <petercon@microsoft.com>, <unicode@unicode.org>
Give me a snail mail address and I'll send some newspapers via the post. Jony > -----Original Message----- > From: "Martin J. D?rst" [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp] > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 11:44 AM > To: Jonathan Rosenne > Cc: 'Shawn Steele'; 'Larry Masinter'; 'Slim Amamou'; public-iri@w3.org; > 'Peter Constable'; unicode@unicode.org > Subject: Re: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs) > > Hello Jonny, > > On 2010/03/04 17:13, Jonathan Rosenne wrote: > > There is no average BIDI user to observe, since there are no BIDI > TLDs and > > no BIDI equivalents to http, ftp etc. > > > > In my way of thinking, and average BIDI user does not normally mix > LTR and > > RTL, programmers excepted. > > Can you expand on this a bit more? E.g. how much do LTR > words/phrases/sentences/whatever appear in average RTL (e.g. Hebrew or > Arabic) text? How much in newspapers? How much in books? How much in > Web > pages? How much in informative text vs. advertisements,...? > > Regards, Martin. > > > Jony > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: public-iri-request@w3.org [mailto:public-iri-request@w3.org] > On > >> Behalf Of Shawn Steele > >> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 7:56 AM > >> To: Larry Masinter; 'Slim Amamou' > >> Cc: public-iri@w3.org; Peter Constable; unicode@unicode.org > >> Subject: RE: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs) > >> > >> The problem isn't an IRI in different contexts (a list of IRIs or > not), > >> the problem is that an IRI *IS* a list. > >> > >> http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx is a lot like { www, > >> microsoft, com, en, us, default.aspx }, so IRI's shouldn't mix up > the > >> parts, (eg: reversing en& us in the display would be misleading). > In > >> a BIDI context, this probably means that the elements of the list > are > >> ordered from right to left. The problem with the Unicode bidi > >> algorithm is that if 2 LTR script elements are adjacent, they lose > the > >> ordering of the list. > >> > >> Users seem to expect that elements of an IRI are drawn as a list > like I > >> described. It has also been proposed that they just be rendered > from > >> LTR regardless of whether any labels are RTL or not, and another > >> suggestion has been that users don't really understand the ordering > of > >> the IRI, so it's okay to reorder as long as it's consistent. > >> > >> I would like to see a usability study to figure out what the average > >> BIDI user expects since us engineers may have biases that most > people > >> don't have. My informal observations and feedback from the BIDI > >> community seems to support the "elements of a list" hypothesis, > however > >> I'd like that to be confirmed (or disproved) by a "real" usability > >> study :) > >> > >> -Shawn > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: Larry Masinter [masinter@gmail.com] on behalf of Larry > Masinter > >> [LMM@acm.org] > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:00 PM > >> To: Shawn Steele; 'Slim Amamou' > >> Cc: public-iri@w3.org; Peter Constable; unicode@unicode.org > >> Subject: RE: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs) > >> > >> If the same Unicode string is used for an IRI in running text and > for > >> an IRI in a context where its use as a "ordered list", then it would > >> seem like > >> > >> * the presentation of the IRI in different contexts is the same > >> > >> is more important than > >> > >> * the presentation of the IRI in known IRI contexts is optimal > >> > >> Do you agree? I don't see how you can have both. > >> > >> Larry > >> -- > >> http://larry.masinter.net > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Shawn Steele [mailto:Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 9:13 AM > >> To: Slim Amamou; Larry Masinter > >> Cc: public-iri@w3.org; Peter Constable; (unicode@unicode.org) > >> Subject: RE: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs) > >> > >>> An IRI is a sequence of Unicode characters. Is there not > >>> already a well-defined way of converting a sequence of > >>> Unicode characters to a visual display? > >> > >> The problem (from my perspective at least) is that the Unicode BIDI > >> rules are somewhat "generic". Unicode expects things like / and . > to > >> be used in a context of same-script stuff, like a date, time or > >> number. IRIs use them as delimiters for a list of elements (labels > in > >> the domain name or folders in the path), in a hierarchical form. > The > >> Unicode BIDI algorithm doesn't recognize that there's an underlying > >> hierarchy, so it can end up "swapping" pieces in that hierarchy in > >> some cases. > >> > >> I'm not sure UTR#36 is the proper place to clarify display of such > >> ordered lists. Proper BIDI rendering of IRIs isn't just a security, > >> but also a usability, problem. It does seem like perhaps this > concept > >> should be mentioned in Unicode somewhere. (IRIs aren't the only > place > >> that similar ordered lists happen). > >> > >> -Shawn > > > > > > > > -- > #-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University > #-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 09:51:28 UTC