consensus Call: TATWEEL
Erik van der Poel
erikv at google.com
Sun Mar 22 16:57:39 CET 2009
Assuming that we are talking about U+0640 ARABIC TATWEEL, my position is:
YES (ie make it DISALLOWED)
The following are just a few comments to explain my current position.
Tatweel appears to be used mainly for display purposes. It does not
appear to be necessary to make separate registrations for names that
differ only in the presence or absence of tatweel.
If we decide to pursue a display preference, the tatweel can be added
to the display character set, though we may wish to recommend a max on
the number of consecutive tatweels in display (say, 2 or so?).
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:
> Based on the on-line exchanges, it appears to me that the general
> consensus is to ban TATWEEL by exception (ie. make it DISALLOWED).
> Please respond with:
> YES (ie make it DISALLOWED)
> NO (ie leave it PVALID)
> OTHER: <explain what you propose>
> I will tally the responses arriving by April 4, midnight, EDT.
> Vint Cerf
> 1818 Library Street, Suite 400
> Reston, VA 20190
> vint at google.com
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
More information about the Idna-update