RE: Last Call summary for draft-ietf-pkix-cert-utf8

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

I suggest the following.  I think it adds the concept of "similar looking."

    When strings are mapped from internal representations to visual 
representations,
    sometimes two different strings will have the same or similar 
visual representations.
    This can happen for many different reasons, including use of 
similar glyphs and
    multiple items being combined into a single glyph.  As a result 
of this situation,
    people doing visual comparisons between two different names may 
think they are
    the same when in fact they are not.  Also, people may mistake one 
string for
    another.  Issuers of certificates and relying parties both need 
to be aware of
    this situation.

This does not impose any untestable requirements.  Any concerns with this text?

Russ


At 07:36 AM 4/13/2006, Santosh Chokhani wrote:
>When strings are mapped from internal representations to visual
>representations, sometimes two different strings will have
>the same visual representations.  This can happen due to similar glyphs,
>multiple items being combined into a single glyph among other reasons.
>When
>this happens people doing visual comparisons between two different names
>may
>think they are the same when in fact they are not.  Also, people may
>mistake one string for another.  Issuers of certificates and relying
>parties both need to be aware of these facts.