Using hyphen in place of NWNJ in Arabic multi-word domains
may cause confusion because arabic script already contains
hyphen-like letters already. that's the point.
That's not related directly to nameprep, but to IDN security.
I hope those small ratholes may not become security holes in
IDN.
Soobok Lee
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Seng/Personal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Soobok Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 6:55 PM
Subject: [idn] Re: [idn-nameprep] Arabic hyphen-like glyph
> I think this discussion take a strange twist.
>
> I am not sure where the discussion about "folding look-alive characters"
> but that is certainly not the intention of nameprep, nor jpchar nor
> tsconv.
>
> Please keep the discussion within the focus of the core interest, namely
> nameprep, jpchar or tsconv for "matching problems".
>
> If there is intention to talk about "folding look-alive characters" then
> please write an I-D, get your 7 core interest then come back to the wg.
> Personally, I do not suggest anyone going into this rathole...
>
> -James Seng
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Soobok Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 11:16 AM
> Subject: [idn-nameprep] Arabic hyphen-like glyph
>
>
> > Arabic glyph U+0640 (Arabic TATWEEL) looks like Latin hyphen(-).
> >
> > Arabic FULLSTOP U+06D4 looks like Latin 'underline' (or 'hyphen' ).
> >
> > Using hyphen instead of punctuation char NWNJ(U+200C,No-width No
> joiner)
> > may not help but cause confusion to native-Arabic people.
> >
> >
> > Soobok Lee, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Martin Duerst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Roozbeh Pournader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: "John C Klensin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Dan Oscarsson"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 10:25 AM
> > Subject: [idn] ZWNJ (was: Re: Just send UTF-8 with nameprep (was: RE:
> > [idn]Reality Check))
> >
> >
> > > At 19:33 01/07/25 +0430, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Martin Duerst wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't want to disagree with your conclusion, but I'm not
> > > > > sure about the premise (that we need the original spelling),
> > > > > so I didn't get into the details of what would follow.
> > > >
> > > >We may need original spelling, for example if we decide that we
> need to
> > > >stop Arabic letters from joining, by using a ZWNJ between them
> (since a
> > > >space is not available). Multiword Arabic domain names will be
> unreadable
> > > >if the words join. But since ZNWJ is stripped at nameprep, we will
> > > >sometimes need to get to the original. You get the idea.
> > >
> > > Hello Roozbeh,
> > >
> > > Many thanks for your comment. As far as I remember, currently ZNWJ
> is
> > > dropped by nameprep without complaining. I think that if that leads
> to
> > > problems as you describe above, we should very carefully reexamine
> > > this decision. I have already told the nameprep design team that
> > > I think that this should be moved to 'disallowed' to avoid surprises
> > > like the above. But I'm not sure moving it to 'disallowed' would
> > > solve all problems (assuming that the hyphen is used for
> concatenating
> > > words).
> > >
> > > Regards, Martin.
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
