Re: [I18nrp] Confusion among characters and strings

Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com> Wed, 17 October 2018 02:48 UTC

Return-Path: <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
X-Original-To: i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88846127598 for <i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ix.netcom.com; domainkeys=pass (2048-bit key) header.from=asmusf@ix.netcom.com header.d=ix.netcom.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7S6Wjmmv8zkR for <i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:48:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CE8B1252B7 for <i18nrp@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:48:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ix.netcom.com; s=dk12062016; t=1539744483; bh=GXUIZrMnxF6B6GKoUkTazyquV7XJl+PRRDbj KKqmyH4=; h=Received:Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date: User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Language: X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; b=Usae4N7qmzemZUhFl9lg8nYExiaI4AdZk 5hO71RiaNsSJ+LgwaYCwePu4YKIFVw3XR9yk7GJw1Z6KV8OVGDsBhXfHRD/Z8qglB0K RCJ/d8Kh8tkw4AQqtwOSze5z0Eyh+l+RNBr1ExNpqOmVhtdLquXTPvd0BEl0roHOpgt eLQ6sOUDlhP1ZyrTr7+S3ZHSBHrO/f6dTpuStsigNu3bmmk5IrGem+LKT4q4Ds4K9jZ 1ilP2H9m5KXHRiq01WkyXvHl8gfa47OeeKHXDrJPFks680IRwudSgjsZZC3A7Ac7Vzm D5QpYsK/zs6DB6SiWElQDnIni3ORYdZN2AStXQ0rA==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk12062016; d=ix.netcom.com; b=eqPTa/wtdQR+Fs0PmRpsPl1ndhJEdAIWyf8SBHuDemYiFBs7VoOPgB5YD6NsAc4ayEkJaCaYsJOCUXhmINAa5kpXUpF5P1IHWRRUc0+r82Ws3evehosbymnIMimF9VJgUT/cQPf0i7A/VAK0uFqnw2UgK+T0BDrIBZYgtWlFxj4irdzeTcDPZn2xtuYpCN2Mc4u6M82niq8yv6JpMAfzZmy5oKw6R5qYYkyOukT/p3axl0PRtHlKH3S+1HwQiEQysK0DmiRlAkfxoS1FjZhggX626WrFWJp6A1CnuOh1R1clps/yow510xSGz/bd7lX5Te7vKyoCglU4A3gNwW7JSg==; h=Received:Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Language:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [46.142.193.22] (helo=[10.14.12.74]) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4) (envelope-from <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>) id 1gCbsO-0005ox-Mn for i18nrp@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 22:48:00 -0400
To: i18nrp@ietf.org
References: <145D45F77511A9B1281FE35D@PSB> <033401d461f1$7d181590$774840b0$@acm.org> <4df1f049-bbdd-9c1c-7752-496fd3ff474c@ix.netcom.com> <77896C689E0BAE86D5EB44C6@PSB>
From: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <684ff592-7f7e-7e0b-8295-7a8b7254b5a6@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:48:12 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <77896C689E0BAE86D5EB44C6@PSB>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------DF25A599EEF11E122D3F724F"
Content-Language: en-US
X-ELNK-Trace: 464f085de979d7246f36dc87813833b2b7eec10b52094b3ef9737c5bb95f7d1f8009660809ba2bed350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 46.142.193.22
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18nrp/eRs2xGpidivm5niYHfiNO_xlm2o>
Subject: Re: [I18nrp] Confusion among characters and strings
X-BeenThere: i18nrp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Review Procedures <i18nrp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i18nrp>, <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i18nrp/>
List-Post: <mailto:i18nrp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18nrp>, <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 02:48:06 -0000

On 10/16/2018 7:14 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> So, where I think we differ is how much beyond IDNA2008 it is
> worth going with guidelines of various sorts.   I wouldn't say
> "zero", but, for the reasons above, I wouldn't go very far.  I
> think Asmus would go much further and, if I were considering
> this only on technical and linguistic grounds, I would probably
> agree with him.

My take is based on the understanding that almost nobody is able to
understand the writing system issues (or issues at the intersection of
writing system and encoding) for *all* or even *most* modern scripts.

The root zone LGR project required about 10-40 people per script and
has taken about 8 years today, if you count the precursor phase.

Some ccTLDs may be able to muster such resources, but ordinary gTLD
operators trying to offer broad support of IDNs are in a tough position
and could benefit from either "minimal standard or best practices".

The former should be very focused and are perhaps what you were
thinking of above. The latter should be styled along the lines of:
"if you allow X, the consequence is that neither users nor rendering
systems for that script will be able to process it." and similar statements
of documented facts and suggested decisions (with supporting rationale).

We are very big on insisting on a documented rationale for all elements
of a root zone LGR; if any of these were to be expanded into "best practice"
documents, I would expect that feature to continue.

The world of writing systems is pretty complex; this complexity is
also "irreducible". There is no Gordian knot solution to "make it all
simple".

That said, applying certain limits on repertoire can often dramatically
simplify issues for a given script. Take disallowing combining marks
for Arabic. Turns out they are not essential for mnemonics in that
script (unlike, say, support for arbitrary types of text) and leaving
them out sidesteps a number of other issues.

A./

A./