[Latingp] Variant cross-script analysis worksheets

[Bill Jouris]

It's been clear for some time, even before Brussels, that you think we should only look at homoglyphs.  (Also that you don't think that there are any in-script homoglyphs.  See the discussion about the schwa and the turned e.)  

But there is a world of difference between agreeing, and merely deciding not to waste time arguing with a closed mind.  Which, for me, is what happened in the discussion in Brussels.   Bill Jouris
Inside Products
bill.jouris at insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)

      From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka at verisign.com>
 To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>; Meikal Mumin <meikal at mumin.de> 
Cc: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland at knipp.de>; "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp" <latingp at icann.org>
 Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 1:43 PM
 Subject: Re: [Latingp] Variant cross-script analysis worksheets
   
#yiv8870410561 #yiv8870410561 -- _filtered #yiv8870410561 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv8870410561 {font-family:DengXian;panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} _filtered #yiv8870410561 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv8870410561 {panose-1:2 0 5 3 0 0 0 2 0 4;} _filtered #yiv8870410561 {panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} _filtered #yiv8870410561 {font-family:HelveticaNeue;panose-1:2 0 5 3 0 0 0 2 0 4;}#yiv8870410561 #yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561MsoNormal, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561MsoNormal, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 a:link, #yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8870410561 a:visited, #yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msonormal0, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msonormal0, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msonormal0 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msonormal0, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msonormal0, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msonormal0 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msonormal, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msonormal, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msonormal {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msochpdefault, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msochpdefault, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msochpdefault {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561msohyperlink {}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561msohyperlinkfollowed {}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561emailstyle18 {}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msonormal1, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msonormal1, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msonormal1 {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561msohyperlink1 {color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561msohyperlinkfollowed1 {color:#954F72;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msonormal01, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msonormal01, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msonormal01 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561emailstyle181 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv8870410561 p.yiv8870410561msochpdefault1, #yiv8870410561 li.yiv8870410561msochpdefault1, #yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561msochpdefault1 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv8870410561 span.yiv8870410561EmailStyle30 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv8870410561 .yiv8870410561MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered #yiv8870410561 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv8870410561 div.yiv8870410561WordSection1 {}#yiv8870410561 I believe we delimited the scope of variants for the Latin script in the face to face meeting in Brussels, did we not?    From:Bill Jouris <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>
Reply-To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>
Date: Friday, May 18, 2018 at 2:18 PM
To: Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka at verisign.com>, Meikal Mumin <meikal at mumin.de>
Cc: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland at knipp.de>, "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp" <latingp at icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Variant cross-script analysis worksheets    It is pretty clear, if one reads the MSR-3 document, that we are supposed to deal withVariants.  Which include, but are NOT limited to, homoglyphs.     Bill Jouris
Inside Products
bill.jouris at insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)    From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka at verisign.com>
To: Meikal Mumin <meikal at mumin.de> 
Cc: "bill.jouris at insidethestack.com" <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>; Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland at knipp.de>; "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp" <latingp at icann.org>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Latingp] Variant cross-script analysis worksheets      we must deal with such confusable characters or sequences of characters in the context of variants   No, we don’t. Confusability is not in scope. We established the Latin panel will deal with homoglyphs or nearly homoglyphs (i.e. font variation) in the context of cross-scripts.    

   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/latingp/attachments/20180519/8acb9c42/attachment-0001.html>