BIDI rules

Erik van der Poel erikv at google.com
Thu Sep 4 17:00:58 CEST 2008


At the IETF meeting, I started thinking that we should not worry about
getting the bidi rules exactly right this time, since we still have
the opportunity to refine the spec as we move from Proposed to Draft,
and then to Standard.

But now I'm wondering whether we might remove the bidi reference from
the IDNAbis protocol, and submit the bidi draft as an Experimental
RFC?

Erik

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Alireza Saleh <saleh at nic.ir> wrote:
> I did some tests on domain visualization when we have RTL characters in the
> label. Some issues arise when you mix the scripts within a domain.
>
>
> As the group decided to eliminate the inter-label checking within the
> protocol in Dublin, and inter-label checks are quite essential, it is
> necessary that these be done SOMEWHERE. Consider, for example, the
> following where LTR and RTL cannot be distinguished:
>
>
> 1) http://3.ا.com = http://3.<ALEF>.com
> 2) http://ا.3.com = http://<ALEF>.3.com
>
>
> After the label checks in IDNA2008 there are many unfixed and known issues
> that remain to be done somewhere else, such as at the application level or
> at the registry. For example the Registry should also apply more
> restrictive rules during the registration to make their TLD safe but this
> will not assure safety beyond the second level. Here applications will be
> expected to take on the safety problems.
>
>
> After the introduction of IDNA, most application developers have been
> thinking about secure ways to make sure users will see the correct
> domain  Some applications may also change direction from LTR to RTL based
> on what they detect from the domain's direction. In that case it would be
> no risk to have a U-label that starts with numbers or contains only
> numbers. Thus it may be possible to relax the current proposed rule in
> IDNA2008.
>
>
> So my suggestion is: Those problems which cannot be almost completely
> resolved at the protocol level should be dealt with only at the
> informational level, and no rules should be specified about them in the
> protocol. One such example is to relax the BIDI rule about numbers, which
> I mentioned above.
>
>
>
> Alireza
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>


More information about the Idna-update mailing list