- From: Lina Kemmel <LKEMMEL@il.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:14:08 +0300
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
Hi Anne, > It seems the RFC tries to prohibit bidirectional formatting > characters from appearing in IRIs, but they are allowed per the > syntax productions. What's the rationale behind that? > Asking this in the context of figuring out what exactly the URL > Standard should say on the matter. I can think of 2 reasons / situations: 1. When bidi formatting characters constitute an integral part of the content. Formatting characters are not visible in display, so looking at an IRI containing those invisible characters, one can be misled as to what the real content is. One of the consequences is that one would not be able to recreate the IRI content when typing it. (BTW that's applicable to any UCCs, not necessarily bidi ones.) 2. When bidi formatting characters are injected to fix appearance of an IRI. People not always realize that UCCs are only invisible in display but completely visible in buffer, like any other regular characters. When adding UCC to enhance readability, there is a need to provide special handling of the IRI content on copy, paste, keydown etc. events. That's often not trivial / cheap. Does the RFC suggest anything to fix appearance of bidirectional IRIs instead? And... could you please provide the link to the RFC please? Best regards, Lina Kemmel Globalization Center of Competency Bidi architect
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2015 13:33:53 UTC