Re: [bidi] BIDI?

You have a point, although for http://MY.DOMAIN.org and http://org.DOMAIN.MY,
the results would be different:
org.NIAMOD.YM//:http and http://org.NIAMOD.YM, respectively.

Aharon

On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com>wrote:

> Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin wrote: "To my taste, first strong in the domain
> name is best".
> First strong in the domain name fails the napkin test. If the logical name
> is (upper case = RTL):
>       MY.DOMAIN.org
> it would be displayed
>       org.NIAMOD.YM
>
> Such a display could come from the logical name "MY.DOMAIN.org", but also
> from "org.MY.DOMAIN", thus it is not unambiguous.
>
>
> Shalom (Regards),  Mati
>
>
>
> From:        "Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin" <aharon@google.com>
> To:        Matitiahu Allouche/Israel/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc:        Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, bidi@unicode.org,
> bidi-bounce@unicode.org, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>, Mohamed
> Mohie <MOHIEM@eg.ibm.com>, public-iri-request@w3.org, Mark Davis ☕ <
> mark@macchiato.com>
> Date:        05/06/2011 18:43
> Subject:        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*<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* <MOHIEM@eg.ibm.com>>
> > To: Matitiahu Allouche/Israel/IBM@IBMIL
> > Cc: *bidi@unicode.org* <bidi@unicode.org>, *bidi-bounce@unicode.org*<bidi-bounce@unicode.org>,
> Mark Davis ☕
> > <*mark@macchiato.com* <mark@macchiato.com>>, "*public-iri@w3.org*<public-iri@w3.org>"
> <*public-iri@w3.org* <public-iri@w3.org>>, Shawn
> > Steele <*Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com* <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>>
> > Date: 03/06/2011 22:06
> > Subject: Re: [bidi] Re: BIDI?
> > Sent by: *public-iri-request@w3.org* <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* <mohiem@eg.ibm.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Matitiahu Allouche <*matial@il.ibm.com* <matial@il.ibm.com>>
> > To: Mark Davis ☕ <*mark@macchiato.com* <mark@macchiato.com>>
> > Cc: *bidi@unicode.org* <bidi@unicode.org>, *bidi-bounce@unicode.org*<bidi-bounce@unicode.org>,
> "*public-iri@w3.org* <public-iri@w3.org>"
> > <*public-iri@w3.org* <public-iri@w3.org>>, Shawn Steele <*
> Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com* <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>>
> > Date: 27/04/2011 10:38 ص
> > Subject: [bidi] Re: BIDI?
> > Sent by: *bidi-bounce@unicode.org* <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
> * <http://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* <mark@macchiato.com>>
> > To: Shawn Steele <*Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com*<Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
> >
> > Cc: "*public-iri@w3.org* <public-iri@w3.org>" <*public-iri@w3.org*<public-iri@w3.org>>,
> *bidi@unicode.org* <bidi@unicode.org>
> > Date: 27/04/2011 02:24
> > Subject: [bidi] Re: BIDI?
> > Sent by: *bidi-bounce@unicode.org* <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>
>
>