I believe we delimited the scope of variants for the Latin script in the face to face meeting in Brussels, did we not? From: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> Reply-To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> Date: Friday, May 18, 2018 at 2:18 PM To: Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, Meikal Mumin <meikal@mumin.de> Cc: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>, "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp" <latingp@icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Variant cross-script analysis worksheets It is pretty clear, if one reads the MSR-3 document, that we are supposed to deal with Variants. Which include, but are NOT limited to, homoglyphs. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) ________________________________ From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> To: Meikal Mumin <meikal@mumin.de> Cc: "bill.jouris@insidethestack.com" <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>; "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp" <latingp@icann.org> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Latingp] Variant cross-script analysis worksheets we must deal with such confusable characters or sequences of characters in the context of variants No, we don’t. Confusability is not in scope. We established the Latin panel will deal with homoglyphs or nearly homoglyphs (i.e. font variation) in the context of cross-scripts.