Unicode & IETF

Asmus Freytag asmusf at ix.netcom.com
Wed Aug 13 06:28:27 CEST 2014

On 8/12/2014 5:48 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> And, once again, Shawn, unless you look at "ß" and see "ss",
> the relationship is an interesting topic but not relevant to the
> current thread,

To the degree that these two sequenced have a relationship, this is the 
kind of relationship where users may (I write may) expect the system to 
treat *non*-identical entities as if they were the same, essentially, 
such desire would be a question of desire for a "fuzzy" match. And 
that's not native to the DNS (despite attempts to bring this in via the 
back door by allocating multiple labels to the same requester). Agree 
with John, it's a different discussion.

>   nor is any resemblance you might see between
> "ß" and "β" (U+03B2).

Typical case of "accidental confusibility".

>   Even if they did look the same to you,
> it might not be relevant unless, e.g., they occupied the same
> key on your keyboard.  As far as I know, no one is trying to get
> a universal similar-looking character recognizer out of these
> process.

This is where I think it intersects with our current discussion.

When two sequences are ruled non-identical it has consequences for 
keyboard layouts; they are usually not both present.

In fact, in the vast majority, one of the sequences (usually the one 
that is not a singleton) is encoded for some specialized use (or 
potential use) and the other one (usually the singleton) is the one that 
is encoded for support of an orthography and can be expected to be 
(widely) available on keyboards.

So, we we agree that the question of whether things are on the same 
keyboard is relevant, then it is relevant to this discussion.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list