- From: Thomas Milo <tmilo@decotype.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 14:14:32 -0400
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Cc: Slim Amamou <slim@alixsys.com>, Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>, "bidi@unicode.org" <bidi@unicode.org>, Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, Murray Sargent <murrays@exchange.microsoft.com>, "aharon@google.com" <aharon@google.com>
Morocco is an interesting case because there Arabic exists in a predominantly francophone enivironment. Thomas Milo Sent from miloPhone www.decotype.com tmilo@decotype.com +31-6-4188-0859 iPhone +31-6-2450-3943 Mobile +31-20-662-5172 Office في ٢٥/٠٥/٢٠١٠، الساعة ١١:٤٧ ص، كتب "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>: > Hello Slim, > > On 2010/05/25 17:34, Slim Amamou wrote: >> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Mark Davis ☕<mark@macchiato.com> >> wrote: >> >>> (...) >>> >>> But we're not. The best way to solve the problem that I can think >>> of can be >>> done right now. Any significant site that wants to support BIDI >>> languages >>> should provide for the ability to have IRIs with *all *RTL >>> characters: >>> host name, path, query, fragment. >>> >> >> This is undesirable because it will create isolated communities > > That's indeed a problem to some extent if mix-and match across > directionality boundaries would be forbidden. I personally think > that forbidding is a bad idea. But I think that market forces will > create pressure towards favoring all-RTL (or mostly-RTL) and all-LTR > (or mostly-LTR) IRIs. > >> and an >> internet that does not look the same depending on whether you are >> American >> or Moroccan. > > I think that's much less of a problem. It's not whether you are > American or Moroccan, it's whether you are looking at an RTL IRI or > an LTR IRI. There's nothing inherently better with ordering the > components from left to right or from right to left, and there's > nothing "isolating" because it wouldn't take anybody more than a few > seconds to get the idea that RTL-character IRIs run RTL, whereas LTR- > character IRIs run the other way round. People are already heavily > used to the fact that Arabic and Hebrew are RTL, anyway. > >> 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? > > >> 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'? > > >> During the discussions I understood the difficulties of such a >> change which >> includes at the same time unicode, IDN and URI (we could say the >> whole >> internet). But I still don't see any other solution which is viable >> and >> consistent with internets principles. > > I think Mark has explained the restrictions on a solution in quite > some details, as I have earlier. Your proposals would be nice, but I > don't see how we'll get there, except with some impossible magic. > > > Regards, Martin. > > -- > #-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University > #-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp >
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 18:14:36 UTC