[Latingp] ACTION NEEDED-PLEASE READ AND COMMENT: Response to IP letter on : Diacritics below a security risk?
Michael.Bauland at knipp.de
Tue Sep 4 11:41:22 UTC 2018
Hi Mirjana, hi Dennis, hi Bill,
thank you very much for putting together that text. I fully agree that
the comments and guidelines from the IP are confusing, in the sense that
it's unclear whether visual similarity entails variant relationships or
In that context, I find the P.S. section one of the most important
comments as it summarises our (or at least my) confusion. Maybe we
should not have it in the P.S. section but rather as a main section.
Another suggestion: should we include the IP's example in our list of
examples (i.e., 1E35 vs. 006B) and at the same time add 014D vs. 006F?
Then we have a letter with line below and without, as well as a letter
with line above and without. I assume the former case is deemed to be a
variant for the IP while the latter case is not. Which to me is
inconsistent. By adding those two examples we point the IP towards this
In case the list of examples gets too large now, I would rather remove
some other example than leaving out the two from above.
| knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
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
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
Chief Executive Officers:
Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
More information about the Latingp