<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Candara">For Comment on Devanagari LGR</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara">In reviewing the draft LGR for Bengali, the
IP noted that the NeoB GP has opted to not include the VISARGA
as a variant between these two scripts. However the Bengali
VISARGA is not listed in Appendix B of the Devanagari LGR
proposal, while VISARGAs for other scripts are listed. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara">This make the intent of the NeoB GP with
relation to the Devanagari vs. Bengali VISARGA somewhat
ambiguous.</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara">Because Bengali and Devanagari share at
least one consonant variant, the Bengali VISARGA could be used
to form labels that are only distinct by the small difference in
shape between the two VISARGAs (two closed vs. two open
circles). If the GP asserts that this distinction is enough to
prevent the kind of security issues normally addressed by
variants, then this should be documented, perhaps by including
the Bengali VISARGA in Appendix B.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara">Otherwise, if the GP feels on review, that
this code point represents a security issue, it could be added
back to the list of cross-script variants.</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara">The IP would like to encourage the NeoB GP
to review the issue and to make the appropriate modifications to
the documentation or specification of the Devanagari LGR (and to
ensure that the Bengali LGR is matches when finalized).</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara"></font><font face="Candara">- Integration
Panel</font></p>
<p><font face="Candara">PS: the IP notes that the GP very properly
does not consider cross-script variants for cases where only
combining marks have a shared form.</font></p>
</body>
</html>