October 2018 - Latingp - lists.icann.org

in-script analysis homework
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis Nov. 7, 2018

Nov. 7, 2018

Meikal, et al Can I get your feedback on my homework? Just want to make sure I’m doing what I am supposed to do. Please review my working document at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GgawEKKwrvC8P0UAuB5DAka1P13s98HEvp2kxn0… Also, I have a question regarding the Stacking cases. I remember we said let’s do all possible combinations… but If it is clear that the “stacking” is perfectly aligned on the first case, then we shouldn’t need to capture all possible combinations, right? See the two examples in my document. In the first iteration (with letter A) it is clear that the stacking of Circumflex and Tilde is perfect. This alignment is not dependent of the letter that follows. Thanks in advance for your input. Dennis

6 18

Re: [Latingp] Variants
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis Oct. 29, 2018

Oct. 29, 2018

Hi Mats, I did attend the ccNSO session on IDN Homographs. While the presentation was given by SSAC members, the information or analysis were not produced by SSAC. They used an “off-the-shelf” third-party’s data, so I would take the information with a bit grain of salt. I did not find a SSAC report. I found their definitions of homoglyph and homograph a bit loose. The dictionary defines homograph as “one of two or more words spelled alike but different in meaning or derivation or pronunciation (such as bow of a ship, a bow and arrow)”. As far as “very similar”, I read this as “nearly identical due to font design”. The example they use (a and ã) would not fall in the very similar, but distinguishable category, in my opinion. -Dennis From: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> Date: Thursday, October 25, 2018 at 2:34 AM To: Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>, "Latingp(a)icann.org" <Latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Variants Dennis, Thank you for adding those bullets. At the first glance I read them as ANDs but of course they should be read as ORs. Speaking of homoglyphs, SSAC had a presentation at the ccNSO Tech Day Monday. I did not attend since it collided with some IDN meeting, but I have looked at the presentation. In the presentation they have one slide on homoglyphs and homographs. From the slide 10: ◉ Homoglyph One of two or more glyphs with shapes that appear identical or very similar a ã https://static.ptbl.co/static/attachments/191691/1540208800.pdf?1540208800 Please note "appear identical", not "are identical". And also "very similar". The message here is quite different from the first message from IP. Please view the presentation and especially slide 17. I have not looked for an equivalent SSAC report. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/ From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com> Date: Wednesday, 24 October 2018 at 19:56 To: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se>, ICANN Latin GP <Latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Latingp] Variants Mats, thanks for the summary. I believe it’s an accurate account of our action items. On #4 there’s some additional nuance. In regards, similarity vs variant, they pointed out to limit considerations of appearance to cases that: - are unambiguous - have overriding security concerns - exhibit true exchangeability (homoglyph) They also mentioned that when looking at similarity cases we should look at those through the lenses of a “careful and observant user”. -Dennis From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> Date: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 at 12:48 PM To: ICANN Latin GP <Latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Latingp] Variants Friends, During the ICANN63 we had one specific session between Latin GP and IP, but there have more IDN sessions where comments relevant to our work has come up. 1. IP wants us to create cross-script variants with all code points in different scripts that has identical or visually similar to LATIN SMALL LETTER O. IP gave the following list in their presentation today: Code Glyph Name 006F o LATIN SMALL LETTER O 03BF ο GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON 043E о CYRILLIC SMALLER LETTER O 0585 օ ARMENIAN SMALL LETTER OH 0B20 ଠ ORIYA LETTER TTHA 0D20 ഠ MALAYALAM LETTER TTHA 101D ဝ MYANMAR LETTER WA IP that a GP has the responsibility to look at other GP's proposals, both completed and work-in-progress, for obvious cases of visual similarity. 2. Besides the "ring" above, they want us to look for the straight line, i.e. l like. 3. IP suggests that we include cases of visually similarity that we have decided to reject in an appendix of two reasons: Firstly to show the reader that we have considered the case, but decided not to included it as variant. In that way we might get less questions during public comment if the we have looked at certain pair. Secondly to give data for others, such as for a 2nd level IDN table creation. I know that we have decided to do it, but I just want to emphasize that it came up. 4. I feel that there is more understanding on creating variants on visual similarity rather than strict homoglyphs. Other GP propose such in-script variants. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/

2 1

AGENDA for the GP call on November the 1st , 2018, 16:00UTC
by Sarmad Hussain Oct. 29, 2018

Oct. 29, 2018

AGENDA for the GP call on November the 1st , 2018, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Letter to Cyrillic GP https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Qu_l6Dw5RPIQapQh4YG3DdY3Bs57wEBd2UGDuPo… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 1. Discussion - Variant analysis - further steps and timeline TOPICS: 2a. Finishing Action Items from Latin GP Brussels Workshop, October 2018 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WtUcHnlIMJ9qvH4HJ3_nAqH8E2wVp74H-fX1l0q… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 2b. Meikal's drawing on paper Worksheet provided by Denis as the result of implementation of Meikal's drawing - In-Script Non-Visual Variant Discovery Analysis [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 1. Next meeting November the 15th ,2018 16:00 1. AOB IDN Meeting room: How to connect: Link to Adobe Connect: https://participate.icann.org/idn/ *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=1064158692&num=1-719-… Participant Passcode: 1064158692

1 0

AGENDA for the GP call on November the 1st , 2018, 16:00UTC
by Mirjana Tasić Oct. 28, 2018

Oct. 28, 2018

Dear GP members. Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next telephone conference. Pitinan will send the remainder later. Any new items for the Agenda are welcome. Regards Mirjana AGENDA for the GP call on November the 1st , 2018, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Letter to Cyrillic GP https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Qu_l6Dw5RPIQapQh4YG3DdY3Bs57wEBd2UGDuPo… 1. Discussion - Variant analysis - further steps and timeline TOPICS: 2a. Finishing Action Items from Latin GP Brussels Workshop, October 2018 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WtUcHnlIMJ9qvH4HJ3_nAqH8E2wVp74H-fX1l0q… 2b. Meikal’s drawing on paper Worksheet provided by Denis as the result of implementation of Meikal’s drawing - In-Script Non-Visual Variant Discovery Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GgawEKKwrvC8P0UAuB5DAka1P13s98HEvp2kxn0…> 1. Next meeting November the 15th ,2018 16:00 1. AOB

2 1

In-Script Non-Visual Variant Discovery Analysis
by Michael Bauland (via Google Docs) Oct. 28, 2018

Oct. 28, 2018

I've shared an item with you: In-Script Non-Visual Variant Discovery Analysis https://docs.google.com/document/d/1t6f_5JK5YIaoHeYSAQYJfXrW-AFnlkezJ9zwP20… It's not an attachment -- it's stored online. To open this item, just click the link above.

1 0

Letter to Cyrillic GP
by Mirjana Tasić Oct. 28, 2018

Oct. 28, 2018

Dear GP members, I made a draft letter to Cyrillic GP about possible In-script variant in Cyrillic script as a consequence of our cross script analysis.. Please help me to finish it. You can edit the letter. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Qu_l6Dw5RPIQapQh4YG3DdY3Bs57wEBd2UGDuPo… Regards Mirjana

1 0

Re: [Latingp] Variants
by Bill Jouris Oct. 25, 2018

Oct. 25, 2018

Hi Mats, Thanks very much for this. I was especially taken by how hard it can be it find the variant (e.g. the linkedin.com example) even when you know the name contains one. As one of the IP members put it in Thursday's meeting, "We aren't talking about cases where two codepoint are shown next to each other for comparison." Even though, necessarily, that is what we do when considering possible variants. Bill Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Mats Dufberg<mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> wrote: _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp

1 0

Re: [Latingp] Variants
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis Oct. 25, 2018

Oct. 25, 2018

Mats, thanks for the summary. I believe it’s an accurate account of our action items. On #4 there’s some additional nuance. In regards, similarity vs variant, they pointed out to limit considerations of appearance to cases that: * are unambiguous * have overriding security concerns * exhibit true exchangeability (homoglyph) They also mentioned that when looking at similarity cases we should look at those through the lenses of a “careful and observant user”. -Dennis From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> Date: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 at 12:48 PM To: ICANN Latin GP <Latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Latingp] Variants Friends, During the ICANN63 we had one specific session between Latin GP and IP, but there have more IDN sessions where comments relevant to our work has come up. 1. IP wants us to create cross-script variants with all code points in different scripts that has identical or visually similar to LATIN SMALL LETTER O. IP gave the following list in their presentation today: Code Glyph Name 006F o LATIN SMALL LETTER O 03BF ο GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON 043E о CYRILLIC SMALLER LETTER O 0585 օ ARMENIAN SMALL LETTER OH 0B20 ଠ ORIYA LETTER TTHA 0D20 ഠ MALAYALAM LETTER TTHA 101D ဝ MYANMAR LETTER WA IP that a GP has the responsibility to look at other GP's proposals, both completed and work-in-progress, for obvious cases of visual similarity. 2. Besides the "ring" above, they want us to look for the straight line, i.e. l like. 3. IP suggests that we include cases of visually similarity that we have decided to reject in an appendix of two reasons: Firstly to show the reader that we have considered the case, but decided not to included it as variant. In that way we might get less questions during public comment if the we have looked at certain pair. Secondly to give data for others, such as for a 2nd level IDN table creation. I know that we have decided to do it, but I just want to emphasize that it came up. 4. I feel that there is more understanding on creating variants on visual similarity rather than strict homoglyphs. Other GP propose such in-script variants. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/

2 1

Variants
by Mats Dufberg Oct. 24, 2018

Oct. 24, 2018

Friends, During the ICANN63 we had one specific session between Latin GP and IP, but there have more IDN sessions where comments relevant to our work has come up. 1. IP wants us to create cross-script variants with all code points in different scripts that has identical or visually similar to LATIN SMALL LETTER O. IP gave the following list in their presentation today: Code Glyph Name 006F o LATIN SMALL LETTER O 03BF ο GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON 043E о CYRILLIC SMALLER LETTER O 0585 օ ARMENIAN SMALL LETTER OH 0B20 ଠ ORIYA LETTER TTHA 0D20 ഠ MALAYALAM LETTER TTHA 101D ဝ MYANMAR LETTER WA IP that a GP has the responsibility to look at other GP's proposals, both completed and work-in-progress, for obvious cases of visual similarity. 2. Besides the "ring" above, they want us to look for the straight line, i.e. l like. 3. IP suggests that we include cases of visually similarity that we have decided to reject in an appendix of two reasons: Firstly to show the reader that we have considered the case, but decided not to included it as variant. In that way we might get less questions during public comment if the we have looked at certain pair. Secondly to give data for others, such as for a 2nd level IDN table creation. I know that we have decided to do it, but I just want to emphasize that it came up. 4. I feel that there is more understanding on creating variants on visual similarity rather than strict homoglyphs. Other GP propose such in-script variants. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/

1 0

FW: List of circle glyphs
by Sarmad Hussain Oct. 23, 2018

Oct. 23, 2018

Dear all, Following the discussion with IP, here's the list of 'circles' as an aid in defining Latin script variants. Regards, Sarmad

1 0