Dear Vint,<br>I am afraid there is a misunderstanding. You may want to decide a rough consensus to DISALLOW TATWEEL at protocol level. But there was no 95% support. There is a full france@large discent that was also documented by ASIWG Iranian contributors. However, that discent is based upon good reasons that may be included in final consensus:<br>
<br>- no DISALLOW should be imposed but adopted by the concerned parties and persons. (It would be like disallowing "w" because it could be replaced by "uu" in English). <br>- no DISALLOW should be imposed through a MUST<br>
- no DISALLOW should be imposed at protocol level.<br><br>MFBerny<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/7/15 Vint Cerf <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I had reached a similar conclusion and I thought I said so on the list<br>
but if not,<br>
it seemed that 95% of the messages were in favor of disallowing this<br>
character.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
v<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Jul 14, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:<br>
<br>
> I concur that the consensus on U+0640 ARABIC TATWEEL was (and probably<br>
> still is) DISALLOWED.<br>
><br>
> Action Item: PAF.<br>
><br>
> Eric<br>
><br>
> Kenneth Whistler wrote:<br>
>> Michael said:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> There is one in Mongolian too.<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>> Michael is referring to U+180A MONGOLIAN NIRUGU, which<br>
>> is another of these stem extenders in a cursive script.<br>
>><br>
>> However, unlike TATWEEL and NKO LAJANYALAN, U+180A<br>
>> is gc=Po (Punctuation, Other), in part because it also<br>
>> has another hyphen-like function in Mongolian. Because<br>
>> it is classed as punctuation, U+180A is already defined<br>
>> as DISALLOWED for IDNA in idnabis-tables-05.txt. So<br>
>> there is nothing further in question about U+180A.<br>
>><br>
>> The issue is about explicitly disallowing U+0640 ARABIC TATWEEL<br>
>> and U+07FA NKO LAJANYALAN, which are gc=Lm, and which<br>
>> are still classed as PVALID in idnabis-tables-05.txt.<br>
>> (But which, when we discussed this last, we had consensus<br>
>> should be DISALLOWED, instead.)<br>
>><br>
>> --Ken<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> On 14 Jul 2009, at 22:58, Mark Davis ⌛ wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>> This may have slipped through the cracks...<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Mark<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 01:35, Vint Cerf <<a href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>> Not yet. I will post a call for consensus on that shortly. V<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> From: Kent Karlsson<br>
>>>> To: Vint Cerf; <a href="mailto:idna-update@alvestrand.no">idna-update@alvestrand.no</a><br>
>>>> Sent: Mon Apr 13 01:26:02 2009<br>
>>>> Subject: Re: consensus on TATWEEL<br>
>>>> I assume this also goes for U+07FA, NKO LAJANYALAN, which IIUC has<br>
>>>> the same nature as TATWEEL.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> /kent k<br>
>>>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Idna-update mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Idna-update@alvestrand.no">Idna-update@alvestrand.no</a><br>
>> <a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update" target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Idna-update mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Idna-update@alvestrand.no">Idna-update@alvestrand.no</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update" target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Idna-update mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Idna-update@alvestrand.no">Idna-update@alvestrand.no</a><br>
<a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update" target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>