[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [idn] Preparation of Internationalized Host Names - Hebrew
- To: Jonathan Rosenne <rosenne@qsm.co.il>, idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: RE: [idn] Preparation of Internationalized Host Names - Hebrew
- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 20:59:23 -0700
- Delivery-date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 21:00:43 -0700
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
At 7:10 PM +0300 7/6/00, Jonathan Rosenne wrote:
>In host names, several Hebrew characters are problematic:
>
>1. Punctuation
>
>05c0 Hebrew Punctuation Paseq
>05c3 Hebrew Punctuation Sof Pasuq
>
>These should be prohibited just like other punctuation.
Please note that not all punctuation is prohibited. The rules for the
specific kinds of punctuation that is prohibited are in the document.
U+05C0, which looks just like the ASCII "vertical bar", is probably
acceptable (since vertical bar is acceptable). U+05C3 looks just like
a colon and is therefore not acceptable; thanks for pointing this
out. (And I have noted it to the Unicode folks for when they update
the standard).
>2. Cantillation Marks
>0591 to 05af
>
>These should be either prohibited or ignored since they do not affect
>pronunciation, similar to ignoring case differences.
>
>Personally, I would rather prohibit them since their presence is most likely
>to be an error.
If they never appear in personal names, company names, or spoken
phrases, then they can safely be prohibited. Is that true for all of
them?
>2. Points
>05b0 to 05c4
>
>These should be either prohibited or ignored since they are optional. In
>modern Hebrew they are seldom used, not all systems support them, and it is
>valid to omit them.
>
>Personally, I would rather ignore them because a user may enter them and why
>not let him.
This is much more problematic. We do not currently have any "ignored"
characters. If I understand this correctly, the host name <HEBREW
LETTER HE><HEBREW POINT SEGOL>.com looks and sounds different than
<HEBREW LETTER HE><HEBREW POINT TSERE>.com, but could be considered
the same for a host name. If so, I think we would have to prohibit
them, not ignore them. Does that sound correct?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium