consensus Call: TATWEEL

Eric Brunner-Williams ebw at
Thu Mar 26 00:01:54 CET 2009

Kenneth Whistler wrote:
>> If, in our choices of allowable code points, we constrain Arabic  
>> (and Farsi and ...) to choices which look correct to Latin  
>> expectations, non-descending rather than descending, inaesthetically  
>> dense rather than combining and extended, to "2nd gen" computer Arabic  
>> (and ...) -- then we may be "solving" one problem by creating another.
> I think this has nothing whatsoever to do with the correct
> choice of allowable code points for Arabic. You are talking
> about typographical layout concerns for Arabic, which are
> issues of rendering systems and fonts -- not the choice of
> the basic letters of the Arabic script appropriate for spelling
> out domain name labels.

Yes, I am _writing_ about mechanism(s) which affect writing Arabic and 
Farsi and ...

> .... U+0640 ARABIC TATWEEL is simply not
> needed at all in domain name labels, as attested by numerous
> Arabic script-using participants in this working group already.

I'm aware of the comments by Manal and others.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list