Re: [bidi] Re: BIDI?

I think that there needs to be a secondary objective: to get all-rtl iris
displayed rtl overall, not in a constant back-and-forth at every separator.
Like Mohammed, I think that this should be based on the presence of rtl in
the domain name. To my taste, first strong in the domain name is best, but I
think that the exact algorithm to use (on the domain name) is less
important.

Aharon

On Jun 5, 2011 10:27 AM, "Matitiahu Allouche" <matial@il.ibm.com> wrote:
> Please define "mostly Latin" and "mostly Arabic or Hebrew".
>
> Are you suggesting to count LTR and RTL characters? Are they all equally
> weighted?
> Does the counting include the scheme (e.g. "http")? the TLD?
>
> Please consider that the prime objective, IMHO, is to enable easy and
> unambiguous human translation from a displayed IRI (napkin, bus side) to
> the corresponding logical string.
>
> Shalom (Regards), Mati
> Bidi Architect
> Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts
> IBM Israel
> Fax: +972 2 5870333 Mobile: +972 52 2554160
>
>
>
>
> From: Mohamed Mohie <MOHIEM@eg.ibm.com>
> To: Matitiahu Allouche/Israel/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: bidi@unicode.org, bidi-bounce@unicode.org, Mark Davis ☕
> <mark@macchiato.com>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>, Shawn
> Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
> Date: 03/06/2011 22:06
> Subject: Re: [bidi] Re: BIDI?
> Sent by: public-iri-request@w3.org
>
>
>
> Hello Mati,
> To overcome the problem you highlighted below I have a suggestion to be
> added for the URL design which is to set the embedding level according to
> the directionality of the domain name.
> 1- If the domain name "MY.OWN.DOMAIN" is mostly Latin set the embedding
> level to even.
> 2- If the domain name "MY.OWN.DOMAIN" is mostly Arabic or Hebrew set the
> embedding level to odd.
>
> Thanks And Best regards,
> Mohamed Mohie , PMP®
> ________________________________________________
> GCoC BIDI ,
> Advisory Software Engineer, Project Manager, M.Sc.
> Cairo Technology Development Center (CTDC)
> IBM Egypt
> email : mohiem@eg.ibm.com
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com>
> To: Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>
> Cc: bidi@unicode.org, bidi-bounce@unicode.org, "public-iri@w3.org"
> <public-iri@w3.org>, Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
> Date: 27/04/2011 10:38 ص
> Subject: [bidi] Re: BIDI?
> Sent by: bidi-bounce@unicode.org
>
>
>
> 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"
> (where
> upper case letters represent RTL letters) will be displayed as "
> 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
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Mark
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 23:20, Shawn Steele <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
>
>
>
>
>