Re: [precis] WGLC: draft-ietf-precis-framework-09.txt

"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Wed, 09 October 2013 09:03 UTC

Return-Path: <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E574721E8125 for <precis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 02:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.457
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.457 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.667, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B25egZZtoVXc for <precis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 02:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45FAC21E80BC for <precis@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 02:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id r9992uXO016748; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 18:02:56 +0900
Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.134]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 4024_022b_9690ce24_30c1_11e3_ac73_001e6722eec2; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:02:56 +0900
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [133.2.210.1]) by itmail2.it.aoyama.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4B3BF4CC; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 18:02:55 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <52551BB3.4080407@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:02:43 +0900
From: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
References: <20130828154603.a94201dea74f29229b4767b2@jprs.co.jp> <20130904162558.7fad8dd5d2304591166dd37a@jprs.co.jp> <CADRqEyrNmY=RTVpUuVmj4qG2d5jy8LsL5uJuXHX7+YtGqkFxrA@mail.gmail.com> <52547128.5070909@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <52547128.5070909@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: precis@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [precis] WGLC: draft-ietf-precis-framework-09.txt
X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings <precis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/precis>, <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/precis>
List-Post: <mailto:precis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis>, <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 09:03:10 -0000

On 2013/10/09 5:55, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 9/11/13 8:06 PM, Joseph Yee wrote:

>> Reviewed the draft, think the approach is good.  Just one minor comment.
>>
>> Same as Florian, had the 'hmm' reaction when reading about
>> directionality and application behaviour at Section 3.1.  It seems that
>> the only application behaviour is permitted pattern.  It doesn't deal
>> with visual appearance I believed.  Maybe replace 'application
>> behaviour' with 'permitted patther of the string' (or 'allowed
>> combination of the string')?
>
> Hmm, I see why you and Florian don't like that text. :-)
>
> How about this?
>
> OLD
>     Directionality:  defines application behavior in the presence of code
>        points that have directionality, in particular right-to-left code
>        points as defined in the Unicode database (see [UAX9]).
>
> NEW
>     Directionality:  defines which strings are to be considered
>        left-to-right (LTR) and right-to-left (RTL), and the allowable
>        sequences of characters in LTR and RTL strings.

That may be an improvement, but it's missing the fact that LTR and RTL 
strings are the only two alternatives allowed.

Also, it would be good to somewhere say that there is currently no 
widely accepted and implemented solution for the display of constructs 
with mixed pieces (e.g. domain names with LTR and RTL components 
(labels), because the problem is inherently extremely hard.

Regards,   Martin.