Re: [bidi] Re: BIDI?

I did focus more on the 'recognition in plain text' part than the 'how to
order once recognized' part, and it clearly needs improvement. A constant
direction of fields would certainly have advantages, for the reasons you
cite.

Mark

*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*


On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 01:37, Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com> wrote:

>    Hello, Mark!
>
> I am glad to see somebody daring to tackle this issue.
>
> You wrote: <quote>
> If a bidiIri is recognized, then it is handled by the UBA as if each
> separator is surrounded by:
>
>    - LRM (if the embedding level is even) or
>    - RLM (if the embedding level is odd)
>
> <end of quote>
>
> This design has the following consequences, which IMHO are not optimal:
> a) The same URL (IRI) will be displayed differently according to the
> embedding level. This is confusing.
> b) Pure Latin-character URLs will be displayed in a new and strange way
> when the embedding level is odd. For instance, "htttp://docs.google.com"
> will be displayed as "com.google.docs//:http".
>
> Consequently, I second Slim Amamou's suggestion to "have a
> predefined/enforced directionality in the specs for each scheme? (ex. LTR
> for URLs)".
> It is true that pure or mostly Hebrew or Arabic URLs will be displayed in a
> way which may seem strange. For instance, "http://MY.OWN.DOMAIN.com<http://my.own.domain.com/>"
> (where upper case letters represent RTL letters) will be displayed as "
> http://YM.NWO.NIAMOD.com <http://ym.nwo.niamod.com/>", but
> 1. The scheme and the TLD currently are pure LTR, and I guess that this is
> not going to change soon, so the display of mixed LTR/RTL URLs will be
> strange anyway.
> 2. The use of domain names with RTL labels is still scarce, there is no
> common usage to overcome, so the public will get accustomed to the "strange"
> display right from the beginning.
>
>
> Shalom (Regards),  Mati
>           Bidi Architect
>           Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts
>           IBM Israel
>           Fax: +972 2 5870333    Mobile: +972 52 2554160
>
>
>
>
> From:        Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>
> To:        Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
> Cc:        "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>, bidi@unicode.org
> Date:        27/04/2011 02:24
> Subject:        [bidi] Re: BIDI?
> Sent by:        bidi-bounce@unicode.org
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Here are some rough thoughts on how we could handle bidi IRIs.
>
> *http://goo.gl/QwSoo* <http://goo.gl/QwSoo>
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Mark
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 23:20, Shawn Steele <*Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com*<Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>>
> wrote:
> I'm wondering what the current thinking around BIDI IRIs is?  A few things
> in draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-05 jump out at me.
>
> -Shawn
>
>   
>
> *http://blogs.msdn.com/shawnste* <http://blogs.msdn.com/shawnste>
>
>