[Latingp] For consideration at LGP first meeting (Agenda point 4)
c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk
Thu Sep 17 10:54:03 UTC 2015
Dear Paul & Meikal,
Thank you for your comments.
1) "Finally, in investigating the possible variant relations, Generation Panels should ignore cases where the relation is based exclusively on aspects of visual similarity."
I think this may mean variant code point relations, but certainly needs clarifying. If my understanding is correct it would mean that Latin o and the identical Armenian letter would not be declared universally as variant code points.
2) I shall save my comments on this point, as I would not want to influence people in a particular direction.
3) As you write, and also according to B.3.2 in the Procedure to develop and maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in respect of IDNA labels, mixed script labels at the Top Level currently seem unlikely. They do exist at lower levels, usually involving the Latin script or Arabic numerals and another script. If my understanding is correct, the issue is whole Armenian labels that are visually similar to whole Latin labels.
I think this is why we are being asked to comment.
Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>
From: Paul Hoffman [mailto:paul.hoffman at icann.org]
Sent: 17 September 2015 01:38
To: Dillon, Chris <c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk>
Cc: LatinGP at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Latingp] For consideration at LGP first meeting (Agenda point 4)
This request is fairly confusing, at least to me, on three counts:
1) Section B.3.4.2 of the LGR Procedures document says "Finally, in investigating the possible variant relations, Generation Panels should ignore cases where the relation is based exclusively on aspects of visual similarity."
2) The Armenian script does not appear to be related to the Latin script in the sense of the LGR rules. The characters that might have similar usage in the scripts mostly look completely different.
3) Even ignoring the previous two points, the request seems to be for cross-script variants, such as for an Armenian letter that looks like a Latin letter. The "Guidelines for LGR" document indicates that cross-script variants might be created, but gives no hints about why we should do that given that the root zone will consist of labels of a single script (according to Section A.3.1).
This feels to me like the Armenian GP's submission is not related to ours, so we should not be commenting on it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Latingp