BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:REQUEST PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:UTC BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T000000 TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:16010101T000000 TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 END:DAYLIGHT END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT ORGANIZER;CN=Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:MAILTO:pitinan.koo@icann.org ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Latin GP:M AILTO:latingp@icann.org ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Sarmad Hus sain:MAILTO:sarmad.hussain@icann.org ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Mirjana Ta sić:MAILTO:Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Tran Canh Toan:MAILTO:toantc@VNNIC.VN ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Fahd Batay neh:MAILTO:fahd.batayneh@icann.org DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:Dear Latin GP members\,\n\n\nThis is a gentle re minder for the Latin GP meetings on Thursday 14 May 2020 at 16:00UTC.\n\n\ nPlease join the meeting at the updated link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/9539 5839226?pwd=ZGxpYmRqV2E2NjloWTFHZWNGbkJWZz09\nPassword: 096517\n\n\nAGENDA for the GP call on May the 13th\, 2020\, 16:00UTC\n\n\n 1. Latin Small Letter I (i\,0069) and Latin Small Letter Dotless I (ı\,0131) the analysi s is already documented\, it only requires the final conclusion. Please fi nd the relevant section in the proposal below.\n Here is the additional r esearch on the stability issue with case folding of dotless I and dotted I by Dennis\n https://docs.google.com/document/d/11aads2CRTE7C_gpSejL8ltW2 Z8fMNZXT2cWdT0yYwcQ/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]\n\n\n\n 2. Report finalization – discuss ion topics\n\n\n * D.4.21 Stacking in Courier New (And Perhaps Other F onts) --- conclusion is missing.\n\n * D.4.22 Finalize the in-script V ariant Analysis sheet.\n\n * D.5.1 Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00D F --- confirm to remove Appendix E as S and S with below diacritics are no t variants.\n\n * D.5.2 Latin Small Letter Dotless I (ı) 0131 --- wai ting for conclusion.\n\n * D.6 Underlining Evaluation Process --- unde rlining is not relevant to the variant analysis. Add conclusion to 6.6.1\n \n * D.7 Generic Glyphs --- to confirm relevant text in section 6.3.4 \n\n * D.8 Caron Above --- to confirm relevant text in section 5.3.2.\ n\n\n 3. Next tasks- discuss the priorities:\n\n * Thorough rea ding and finalization of In-Script variant analysis\n\n * Review proposed confusables for Similarity review\n\n * Report finalizat ion\n\n * XML production and correction of possible errors\n\n * Test data production\n\n 4. Next meeting May the 21st 2020\ , 16:00 UTC\n\n 5. AOB\n\n\n\nRegards\,\nPitinan\n\n\n--------------\nTo join via phone\, please find your local number at https://icann.zoom.us/u /aw6COk4xD\nMeeting ID: 953 9583 9226\nPassword: 096517\n\n\nD.5.2 Latin S mall Letter Dotless I (ı) 0131\n\n\n\nThere are four Latin code points th at have a special case (upper case/lower case) relationship:\n\n · U+0069 Latin Small Letter I ("i")\n\n · U+0049 Latin Capita l Letter I ("I")\n\n · U+0131 Latin Small Letter Dotless I ("ı ")\n\n · U+0130 Latin Capital Letter I with Dot Above ("İ")\n\ n\n\nIn most locales Latin Small Letter I is lower case of Latin Capital L etter I\, and reverse Latin Capital Letter I (U+0069) is upper case of Lat in Small Letter I (U+0069). In those locales\, Latin Capital Letter I (U+0 049) is also upper case of Latin Small Letter Dotless I. It could be descr ibed as in the following chart:\n\n\n\nTable D.8. Case Relationships for 0 069\, 0049\, 0130\, and 0131\n\nCharacter\n Process\n Result ing Character\n Process\n Resulting Character\n\nLatin Small Letter I\n\nU+0069\n up case →\n Latin Capital Letter I\n \nU+0049\n down case →\n Latin Small Letter I\n\nU+0069\n\ nLatin Small Letter Dotless I\n\nU+0131\n up case →\n Lati n Capital Letter I\n\nU+0049\n down case →\n Latin Small L etter I\n\nU+0069\n\nLatin Capital Letter I with Dot Above\n\nU+0130\n down case →\n Latin Small Letter I\n\nU+0069\n up case →\n Latin Capital Letter I\n\nU+0049\n\n\n\nIn two locales\, Tur kish and Azeri\, respectively\, the case relationship is different. In tho se two\, Latin Small Letter I and Latin Capital Letter I with Dot Above ar e in mutual upcase/downcase relationship to each other\, as well as Latin Small Letter Dotless I and Latin Capital Letter I\, which could be describ ed as in the following chart:\n\n\n\nTable D.9. Case Relationships in Turk ish and Azeri Locales\n\nCharacter\n Process\n Resulting Cha racter\n Process\n Resulting Character\n\nLatin Small Letter I\n up case →\n Latin Capital Letter I with Dot Above\n down case →\n Latin Small Letter I\n\nLatin Small Letter Do tless I\n up case →\n Latin Capital Letter I\n down case →\n Latin Small Letter Dotless I\n\n\n\nIf we look at the r epertoire of Latin code points for the root zone\, as proposed by the Lati n Generation Panel\, Latin Small Letter I and Latin Small Letter Dotless I are included\, whereas the capital letters are excluded. Capital letters are not even valid in IDNA2008\, so the question is\, is the case relation ship described here a problem or even relevant?\n\n\n\nBefore IDNA2008\, t here was IDNA2003. Even though IDNA2003 has been replaced by IDNA2008 it i s still implemented. For example\, the web browser Google Chrome to date r emains IDNA2003 compliant but not fully IDNA 2008 compliant. In IDNA2003 t here is a pre-process\, normalization\, of domain names before conversion to Punycode. That normalization includes down casing of Latin characters. For ASCII labels there is already an equivalence between upper case and lo wer case letters. And this is what users\, based on decades of experience\ , expect to happen.\n\n\n\nIn an IDNA2003-compliant web browser it is expe cted that "EXÄMPEL" and "EXAMPLE" are equivalent to "exämpel" and "examp le"\, respectively. In an IDNA2008 browser "EXAMPLE" must be accepted\, bu t "EXÄMPLE" could be rejected since "Ä" is not valid\, but that is not h ow e.g. Mozilla Firefox and Apple Safari have been designed to handle the problem. They also do down case before the formal IDNA2008 process.\n\n\n\ nEven though down casing is not part of the formal IDNA2008 process\, one of the IDNA2008 documents\, RFC 5894\, states that the user interface of a n application\, before IDNA2008 processing\, can do normalization. The dow n casing in IDNA2008 browsers should probably be seen in that light.\n\n\n \nWhile "TÄT" will probably be down cased to "tät" in the browser\, what should the browser do with "TIT"? Depending on the locale that the browse r is running in\, it may be down cased to either "tit" or "tıt" (with or without the dot).\n\n\n\nThe casing\, in an application\, is expected to g o in one direction\, from upper case to lower case. When domain names are presented in text\, however\, it is common that domain names are presented in upper or mixed case. So "ice" might become "Ice" or "İce".\n\n\n\nIt is quite obvious from the text above that case shift of dotted or dotless I could create erroneous lookup\, but the question is how large threat it would be to the users. Since the applications are expected to go from uppe r case to lower case\, when they handle domain names\, we should consider a situation where down casing could result in different lower case letters \, i.e. when CAPITAL LETTER I is down cased.\n\n\n\nWith a non-Turkish and non-Azeri locale\, a Latin CAPITAL LETTER I in a domain name is either do wn cased to Latin Small Letter I (IDN label) or equivalent to Latin Small Letter I (ASCII label).\n\n\n\nWith a Turkish or Azeri locale\, a Latin Ca pital Letter I is expected to be down cased to Latin Small Letter Dotless I\, but in an ASCII label in a domain name\, it is still expected to be eq uivalent with Latin Small Letter I\, because that is what the DNS standard s says.\n\n\n\nThere is an obvious risk that\, in a Turkish or Azeri local e that the two letters are confused or mistreated due to the case folding\ , and this confusion could be misused. To be on the safe side Latin Small Letter I and Latin Small Letter Dotless I should be variants. Accordingly\ , the following variant set could be the optimal solution:\n\n\n\nTable D. 10. Possible Variant Relationships for 0069 and 0131\n\n\n\nGroup\n Dotless i vs. i\n\nTarget\n Source\n Variant Candidate [Yes /No]\n Disposition [Allocatable/\n\nBlocked]\n Rationale\n\n Code Point\n Glyph\n Name\n Code Point\n Glyph \n Name\n\n0069\n i\n Latin Small Letter I\n 0 131\n ı\n Latin Small Letter Dotless I\n YES\n Blocked\n Risk of confusion due to inconsistent case folding\n\n0 131\n ı\n Latin Small Letter Dotless I\n 0069\n i\n Latin Small Letter I\n YES\n Blocked\n Risk of confusion due to inconsistent case folding\n\n\n\n\n SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:[Updated Zoom Link] Latin GP Meeting DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20200514T160000 DTEND;TZID=UTC:20200514T170000 UID:9B8DE6EB-D66B-4527-903D-3C0FACAFBFBE RECURRENCE-ID;TZID=UTC:20200514T160000 CLASS:PUBLIC PRIORITY:5 DTSTAMP:20200514T112146Z TRANSP:OPAQUE STATUS:CONFIRMED SEQUENCE:10 LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://icann.zoom.us/j/95395839226?pwd=ZGxpYmRqV2E 2NjloWTFHZWNGbkJWZz09 X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:10 X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:2118355385 X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1 X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:3 X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE BEGIN:VALARM DESCRIPTION:REMINDER TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M ACTION:DISPLAY END:VALARM END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR