- From: Jony Rosenne <rosennej@qsm.co.il>
- Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:00:29 +0200
- To: <www-international@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <001801c515ca$97efcf20$0100000a@QSM7>
So this type of string should be avoided - but the restriction should be minimal, and strings that do not cause a problem should be allowed. Jony -----Original Message----- From: www-international-request@w3.org [mailto:www-international-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Matitiahu Allouche Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 3:10 PM To: Jony Rosenne Cc: www-international@w3.org; www-international-request@w3.org Subject: RE: IDN - RTL An example of major problem could be the logical string "www.ALEF5.123.il" which would be displayed "www.5.123FELA.il", which is quite confusing, and subject to several interpretations. Shalom (Regards), Mati Bidi Architect Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts IBM Israel Phone: +972 2 5888802 Fax: +972 2 5870333 Mobile: +972 52 2554160 "Jony Rosenne" <rosennej@qsm.co.il> Sent by: www-international-request@w3.org 18/02/2005 14:05 To <www-international@w3.org> cc Subject RE: IDN - RTL The restriction is too restrictive and unrealistic from the point of view of RTL users. It is certain that not allowing these names will cause problems. I would like to see strong evidence that a string like аму1 or <http://www.аму1.il/> www.аму1.il causes a major problem. Jony > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik van der Poel [ <mailto:erik@vanderpoel.org> mailto:erik@vanderpoel.org] > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 1:13 PM > To: Jony Rosenne > Cc: www-international@w3.org > Subject: Re: IDN - RTL > > > Hi Jony, > > This restriction is specified in section 6 of the stringprep spec: > > <http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3454.txt> http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3454.txt > > If digits *were* allowed at the end, would there be any problems? For > example, would there be some ambiguity if we were trying to determine > how to display the string? > > Thanks, > > Erik > > Jony Rosenne wrote: > > The restriction is not realistic. Digits should be allowed > at least at the > > end. >
Received on Friday, 18 February 2005 15:38:51 UTC