[arabic-vip] review of comments to Arabic team report

[Manal Ismail]

Baher, I tried to re-draft this part ..
I think splitting this part into 2 paras would address a great deal of my concerns ..
Hope the attached makes sense and can be agreed upon by other colleagues ..
 
--Manal

________________________________

From: arabic-vip-bounces at icann.org on behalf of baher.esmat
Sent: Tue 29/11/2011 06:53 PM
To: Abdulaziz Zoman; Behnam Esfahbod
Cc: arabic-vip at icann.org
Subject: Re: [arabic-vip] review of comments to Arabic team report


Team: 

I'm still not clear if you want to include more text about ZWNJ in your response to public comments. 

Also, there are a couple of comments by Manal, which I have not heard any reaction to. 

Please see attached and advise. We've already passed the deadline. 

Best,
Baher


On 11/29/11 7:59 AM, "Abdulaziz Zoman" <azoman at citc.gov.sa> wrote:



	Fare enough ... thanks Behnam.
	 
	 
	-----------------------------
	????????? ?? ??? ???????
	Abdulaziz H. Al-Zoman
	
	
	From: behnam at gmail.com [mailto:behnam at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Behnam Esfahbod
	Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 8:36 AM
	To: Abdulaziz Al-Zoman
	Cc: Siavash Shahshahani; arabic-vip at icann.org
	Subject: Re: [arabic-vip] review of comments to Arabic team report
	
	
	Hi,
	
	2011/11/29 Abdulaziz Al-Zoman <azoman at citc.gov.sa>
	The (original) statement on the report does not reflect the team viewpoint:
	
	      "ZWNJ is already a CONTEXT character with rules identified (though they need to be extended as proposed)."
	This statements may leads to the fact that the CONTEXT rules is resolving all the issues and concerns regarding the use of ZWNJ. Which is not.
	So, I added the following statement which is in line with the team's recommendations (hence, I did not list the cons or pros):
	       "ZWNJ raises a number of problems to be addressed and resolved before it can be adapted at the TLDs."
	
	
	
	That part of the statement only refers to a specific part of the comment by John Klensin (page 7, paragraph 3) where he discusses the Unicode-level problem with defining a "script" and listing the characters in a script.
	
	
	
	Thus, I think the problem is that the statement is not clear enough. I suggestion adding a sentence saying that this part "is talking about the using Unicode characters' properties to define the scripts, and DOES NOT concert security and/or usability issues".
	
	
	
	Also, "CONTEXT" is technically not defined anywhere in the documents, so we should either use "Contextual Rules" or "CONTEXTJ" (both from RFC 5891) to be more specific.
	
	
	
	Thanks,
	
	-Behnam
	
	
	
	
	

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Summary of Comments for Arabic script VIP - comments[4].doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 33792 bytes
Desc: Summary of Comments for Arabic script VIP -
	comments[4].doc
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/arabic-vip/attachments/20111129/02ea6687/SummaryofCommentsforArabicscriptVIP-comments4-0001.doc