Tables and contextual rule for Katakana middle dot

[Paul Hoffman]

At 6:24 PM -0400 4/7/09, John C Klensin wrote:
>--On Tuesday, April 07, 2009 11:29 -0700 Mark Davis
><mark at macchiato.com> wrote:
>
>> First off, the Katakana middle dot is distinctive enough that
> > I see no problem with visual confusion.
>
>So, you are relying on a particular font presentation, one that
>is certainly not required by The Unicode Standard or anything
>else, in a script that is famous for artistic calligraphy and
>font design to determine distinctiveness?   One might certainly
>have a different opinion.

So we are now back to choosing characters based on visual confusion? How the heck did we get here?

>* The Katakana Middle Dot is Punctuation (Po).  That category
>is, by default, DISALLOWED.  So the discussion is whether it is
>important enough to make into an exception (whether that
>exception makes it PVALID or CONTEXTO) and whether it is safe to
>do so.  Yoneya-san has made the argument that it is important as
>a word separator.  

Agree.

>Absent anything else, I would personally
>accept that

Good...

>while noting that there are lots of punctuation
>characters in lots of scripts and contexts that people would
>like to use as word separators, including, curiously, U+002E.

Please be clear: are you proposing that we take out the punctuation (Po) characters from PVALID and CONEXTEO? Or are you just "noting"?