[Latingp] Homoglyphs within Latin script
Tan Tanaka, Dennis
dtantanaka at verisign.com
Fri Jan 5 15:13:43 UTC 2018
Hi Michael,
They are not the same character. They look alike in lower case, but are different in upper case (i.e. disunification by case property). The IP briefly discussed this case of 01DD and 0259 in their feedback to our Principles document and suggested that these two should not be variants. Hence my question about more evidence.
-Dennis
On 1/5/18, 10:10 AM, "Michael Bauland" <Michael.Bauland at knipp.de> wrote:
Hi Dennis, hi Mats,
On 05.01.2018 16:02, Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp wrote:
> Thanks Mats.
>
>
>
> A follow up question, is there evidence that these two code points are
> used interchangeably in the languages the repertoire team analyzed? I
> ask because the IP will ask for more evidence of a variant relationship
> besides visual appearance. Per the Procedure “Generation Panels should
> ignore cases where the relation is based exclusively on aspects of
> visual similarity”.
I'm not sure we need additional evidence, because in this case it's not
mere "visual similarity" but those two are actually the same. And I
don't think we have another choice in the case of homoglyphs, but to
make them variants. On the contrary, I think we had to argue if we
wanted to not make them variants.
Michael
--
____________________________________________________________________
| |
| knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
------- Technologiepark
Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9
44227 Dortmund
Germany
Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0
Fax: +49 231 9703-200
Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland at knipp.de
Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland at knipp.de
Register Court:
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
Chief Executive Officers:
Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
More information about the Latingp
mailing list