- From: Abdulrahman I. ALGhadir <aghadir@citc.gov.sa>
- Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 14:17:26 +0300
- To: "Slim Amamou" <slim@alixsys.com>
- Cc: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>, <public-iri@w3.org>, <bidi@unicode.org>, "Shawn Steele" <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, "Murray Sargent" <murrays@exchange.microsoft.com>, <aharon@google.com>
- Message-ID: <0F9C0B65969D644EA7B34DF381465F660153A419@RY02MAIL.citc.gov.sa>
In which logic to force RTL users to have their links in LTR? You know that there are Os(s) which display in RTL matter. Beside direction displaying is all about OS. From: slim.amamou@gmail.com [mailto:slim.amamou@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Slim Amamou Sent: 25/May/2010 2:03 PM To: Abdulrahman I. ALGhadir Cc: Martin J. Dürst; Mark Davis ☕; public-iri@w3.org; bidi@unicode.org; Shawn Steele; Murray Sargent; aharon@google.com Subject: Re: Special ordering for BIDI URLs To which I responded : http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2010-February/006530.html Then you said : http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2010-February/006531.html Then I said : http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2010-February/006532.html On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Abdulrahman I. ALGhadir <aghadir@citc.gov.sa> wrote: Well check this out http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2010-February/006529.html cause your proof was disproved back then. From: public-iri-request@w3.org [mailto:public-iri-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Slim Amamou Sent: 25/May/2010 1:30 PM To: Martin J. Dürst Cc: Mark Davis ☕; public-iri@w3.org; bidi@unicode.org; Shawn Steele; Murray Sargent; aharon@google.com Subject: Re: Special ordering for BIDI URLs 2010/5/25 "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> (...) This is maybe the case already now, but it should not be our aim. In a sense, this even breaks the principle of net neutrality. In what sense exactly would this break net neutrality? In the sense of a URI transmitted over the internet could not look the same on both ends in some situations. For the record I proposed enforcing LTR directionality for URIs as a solution, and already proved that at least for the HOST part (IDN), and given the current specs, labels MUST be ordered LTR. Could you give a pointer to that 'proof'? http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2010-February/006528.html -- Slim Amamou | سليم عمامو http://alixsys.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This message and its attachment, if any, are confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete this message and its attachment, if any, from your system. You should not copy this message or disclose its contents to any other person or use it for any purpose. Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC). CITC accepts no liability for damage caused by this email. -- Slim Amamou | سليم عمامو http://alixsys.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This message and its attachment, if any, are confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete this message and its attachment, if any, from your system. You should not copy this message or disclose its contents to any other person or use it for any purpose. Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC). CITC accepts no liability for damage caused by this email.
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 11:18:04 UTC