IDNA Comparisons
Cary Karp
ck at nic.museum
Fri Jul 17 21:09:35 CEST 2009
Braille is not tied to the Latin script and a given Braille cell
potentially represents a number of different characters. Since neither
IDNA nor the DNS convey the language-specific information necessary to
indicate the intended non-tactile codepoint, I'm not sure how this
(otherwise very interesting) discussion is relevant to our task.
/Cary
Quoting Andrew quoting Eric:
>> latin. From observing my son, some encoding sequences have an additional
>> meaning, not contained in the toAscii value sequence and the literal
>> transliteration.
>
> Without expressing any opinion on the merits of any of these positions
> (since I just don't have enough information to have a sensible
> opinion, which nicely distinguishes this from the case where I have
> enough information but come to a senseless opinion anyway), the above
> sounds rather like an argument starting from the meanings perceptible
> by native speakers of a natural language, as compared to meanings
> "formally" part of the language. To me, that sounds like criteria for
> writing literature, which we've all agreed is out of scope.
>
> I think the proper question, as we've maintained with other
> characters, is whether there is a linguistic community that writes
> those characters as letters (this is why Tatweel has been ruled out).
> If the answer is yes, then it's registry policy what to do with them.
> At least, I _think_ that has been the general principle (without
> elevating it to a hard and fast rule).
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list