- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:18:23 +0200
- To: Lina Kemmel <LKEMMEL@il.ibm.com>
- Cc: Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Lina Kemmel <LKEMMEL@il.ibm.com> wrote: > 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.) Even ASCII, right? rn vs m et al. > Does the RFC suggest anything to fix appearance of bidirectional IRIs > instead? No, this is still a matter of research. To be clear, the IETF has published https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-bidi-guidelines on the subject, but neither is very conclusive or adopted as such by user agents. E.g., studying this security issue reported against Chrome might be of interest: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=351639 The reason I'm working on this is https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27641 which tries to figure out what https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ needs to say on the subject. I suspect the considerations mostly need to give advice as how to best display URLs, even with bidirectional code points going around. The Chrome issue so far has the best leads as to what that might be. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2015 14:18:49 UTC