Hi Mats, hi all, sorry to drop in so late. I was sick for a week and then there was loads of work to catch up with. On 06.04.2018 11:21, Mats Dufberg wrote:
Dennis,
I believe that a visual test of running text is relevant for Internet identifiers. Internet identifiers are often found in running text.
Without looking at the specific example, I agree with Dennis that running text should not be relevant. The human mind is trained to look at whole words when reading and not looking at every single character. There are many tricks you can do with letters/words, while the reader is still able to read the sentence without problems, and might not even notice there is something "wrong." However, I disagree with Dennis, when he said:
this panel has agreed that visual similarity is outside the scope of our work.
As stated in the draft document: "A Latin code point will be deemed a variant with a cross-script code point when the two code points or sequence of code point are visually identical or nearly identical when the difference can be attributed to different font styles." "nearly identical" to me is visual similarity. But of course, we need to look at all the cases to decide whether something is nearly identical or not. For the dotless I I would vote they are not nearly identical (otherwise we could also have u and ü being nearly identical, and we shouldn't go that way). Still, the dotless I remains in discussion due to the fact of the complexity of up-casing and down-casing, as Mats said. Best regards, 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