[UA-discuss] SAC095 - SSAC Advisory on the Use of Emoji in Domain

Dusan Stojicevic dusan at dukes.in.rs
Thu Jun 1 13:18:02 UTC 2017

Dear all,


First, +1 for Jothan. Exactly.


Secondly, people can write and make written conversation without using any of the smileys or emoji like signs, by simply using their alphabet. And we have big number of issues with letters, on all fields. On the other hand, emoji is there mainly for two reasons> to express the feelings more quickly (but often not clearly) in chats (or live, written conversation of any kind), and for fun. Both reasons are not essential to us like using different alphabet in domain names, or using long TLD names. From my previous life as editor-in-chief, my rule was very simple – there are no smileys in texts. If you are an author and not expressed the opinion, meaning or joke right, smileys or emoji can’t help you and you must change this sentence/paragraph. Readers won’t lough because there is J at the end of the sentence, but because you wrote something funny.


When (or maybe if) they come in our orbit, and we previously solve all essential issues, then we can consider it. Until then, let the ccTLDs, who “dare” to use emoji in their tables, solve possible issues.





From: ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jothan Frakes
Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 2:34 AM
To: Mark Svancarek <marksv at microsoft.com>
Cc: ua-discuss at icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] SAC095 - SSAC Advisory on the Use of Emoji in Domain


I think emoji is fascinating and potentially interesting to watch, and am not suggesting that emoji, once a bit more settled and standardized by those respective groups, may drift into our orbit.  


Rather, I am suggesting that we not allow it to distract us while working the existing issues.



On May 31, 2017 09:51, "Mark Svancarek via UA-discuss" <ua-discuss at icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss at icann.org> > wrote:

Your explanation makes sense to me.

-----Original Message-----
From: ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org>  [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org> ] On Behalf Of Andre Schappo
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 9:49 AM
To: ua-discuss at icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss at icann.org> 
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] SAC095 - SSAC Advisory on the Use of Emoji in Domain

> On 31 May 2017, at 16:59, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> > wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 03:49:21PM +0000, Andre Schappo wrote:
>> My standard practice is to make, whenever possible, my links WYSIWYG. I think it a good practice. Sometimes it is not possible because of overly long and complex URLs.
> It's never actually been a recommendation from hypertext people,
> however.  They've always suggested that you should put links liberally
> in running text that is in itself nicely readable.  So,
>    <a href="target">In a previous post</a>, we discussed UA…
> as opposed to
>    In a previous post, which you can find at <a
>    href="target">target</a>, we discussed UA …
> Why do you think it's a good practice?  It makes for very stilted
> text.
> A

User reassurance - knowing the exact address of the website they will visit if they click the link.
Transparency - stating clearly and exactly the address of the website they will visit if they click the link.
User feedback - Users can visually verify that the address of the website they land on after clicking the link is indeed what was stated.

I consider it makes for better security because the address is upfront for visual inspection/examination and not hidden behind some text string/image.

There is much discussion/arguments on IDNs and phishing/spoofing because of, for instance, confusables.

I consider spoofing/phishing is more easily achieved with links hiding behind text/images without going to the effort of employing and registering IDNs containing confusables.

eg <a href="https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FWeWillStealYourMoney.com <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FWeWillStealYourMoney.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C579786462f804689d6ed08d4a845192e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636318462118900393&sdata=I3WPZk7CBmK5Jldlr4VCaqySuyk80nHfjEidaFOYajw%3D&reserved=0> &data=02%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C579786462f804689d6ed08d4a845192e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636318462118900393&sdata=I3WPZk7CBmK5Jldlr4VCaqySuyk80nHfjEidaFOYajw%3D&reserved=0">the honest and genuine bank<a>

I too used to hide links behind text/images but for about 4/5 years now I have been making links explicit as I consider it better security and better practice. One way in which I retain reading flow is to treat the link as a full stop ie terminating a sentence. Also, one can use links in a similar manner to the way citations are used in academic papers

André Schappo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ua-discuss/attachments/20170601/63fa3858/attachment.html>

More information about the UA-discuss mailing list