I looked at the material and then I wondered why U+045F CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER DZHE is matched to U+1EF1 LATIN SMALL LETTER U WITH HORN AND DOT BELOW and not to U+1EE5 LATIN SMALL LETTER U WITH DOT BELOW (which is also in our repertoire). I think that U+045F and U+1EE5 are more similar than U+045F and U+1EF1.

 

First displayed as text in the mail:

 

                             1EF1  045F  1EE5 

Times:                   ự        џ        ụ

 

Helvetica:             ự       џ        ụ

 

Courier new: ự   џ   ụ

 

 

Here as a picture:

 

 

 

Yours,

Mats

 

---

Mats Dufberg

DNS Specialist, IIS

Mobile: +46 73 065 3899

https://www.iis.se/en/

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of ICANN Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>

Reply-To: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>

Date: Monday, 30 July 2018 at 04:57

To: "Michael.Bauland@knipp.de" <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>, ICANN Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>

Subject: Re: [Latingp] Latin-Cyrillic cross-script analysis

 

    Latin GP,

   

    Based on Michael's and Bill's input I have resolved all the pending cases. These are highlighted as <green>include</green> or <red>excluded</red> in each of the sets. Review the comments for context as well.

   

    Please review the revised doc and provide any other comments you may have.

    

    Thanks,

    Dennis

   

    On 7/27/18, 11:30 AM, "Latingp on behalf of Michael Bauland" <latingp-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> wrote:

   

        Hi all,

       

        On 26.07.2018 21:12, Bill Jouris wrote:

        > I have reviewed these.  In several cases, I believe it is possible to

        > resolve the issue using the same principle:

        > When both inspectors have the same rating for the highest ranked font,

        > and the only difference is between fonts, there seems no reason to look

        > further. Just take the agreed highest rating (for example 2) and move on.

       

        I agree with Bill. We decided to look at several fonts in order to find

        more cases for possible variants (not to find less cases). Therefore it

        makes sense to always take the rating from the highest ranked font. In

        case both inspectors agree, there is nothing more to do.

       

        

        > I also noticed a couple of cases where the first inspector had a rating

        > of 5 (i.e. no candidate found) while the second inspector had something

        > else.  Perhaps the first inspector could go back and consider the

        > candidate which, apparently, arose after his initial inspection.  Even

        > if that results in a rating of 4 (different), it would at least give us

        > someplace to start discussion.

       

        Done. Those were my cases and I changed my original 5 to the rating

        referring to the newly found candidate.

       

        Furthermore I added my vote to the occasions were first and second

        inspector disagreed (and Bill's suggestion from above does not work). If

        the others could do the same, we could probably apply some majority vote.

       

        Have a nice weekend

       

        Michael

       

        

        --

        ______________________ ______________________________ ________________

             |       |

             | knipp |            Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH

              -------                    Technologiepark

                                          Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9

                                          44227 Dortmund

                                          Germany

       

             Dipl.- Informatiker          Fon:    +49 231 9703-0

                                          Fax:    +49 231 9703-200

             Dr. Michael Bauland         SIP:    Michael.Bauland@knipp.de

             Software Development        E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de

       

                                          Register Court:

                                          Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728

       

                                          Chief Executive Officers:

                                          Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp

       _______________________ ________________________

        Latingp mailing list

        Latingp@icann.org

        https://mm.icann.org/mailman/ listinfo/latingp

       

    

    __________________________ _____________________

    Latingp mailing list

    Latingp@icann.org

    https://mm.icann.org/mailman/ listinfo/latingp

   

______________________________ _________________
Latingp mailing list
Latingp@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/ listinfo/latingp