Tables and contextual rule for Katakana middle dot

Mark Davis mark at
Fri Apr 10 19:10:02 CEST 2009

Your statement wasn't offensive, and I didn't take it as such. (Email is a
particularly clumsy medium for conveying tone, so it is easy to misinterpret
what someone says.)

I think the reason that John raised it, and that I followed in that vein, is
that visual representation is a key factor in our deliberations. We do have
exceptions to the LMN rule, and those exceptions are based on whether (a)
the character is needed -- in common usage in words, and (b) whether
inclusion causes "harm".

The only demonstrated harm for non-ASCII characters in IDNA is where there
there is visual confusion, so that's why it comes up as a criterion in this


2009/4/8 Patrik Fältström <patrik at>

> On 8 apr 2009, at 22.16, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>  On 8 apr 2009, at 00.41, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>  So we are now back to choosing characters based on visual confusion? How
>>> the heck did we get here?
>> Because Mark started using visual representation.
> I have been bashed privately (again) because of this statement, and I am
> told I should have written "Because John brought it up, so you should have
> hit on John and not Mark".
> If that is the interpretation people have, I misunderstood the first email
> from John, and apologize.
> The rest of my message still stands, and this comment from me was
> irrelevant, but to be honest, I think also the question was as irrelevant
> and I just want to explain that my reaction was based on the fact the
> question was asked.
> Once again, specifically to Mark, my apologies.
>    Regards, Patrik
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Idna-update mailing list