You are right that Arabic is no more problematic than Hebrew, and that my specific mixed-script example isn’t actually in the document.
Looking at the document again, I see that it might be construed that we are calling out Arabic as a unique problem script.
Perhaps we should edit the document to replace “Arabic.arabic@arabic” with rtl.rtl@rtl?
From: Richard Merdinger [mailto:rmerdinger@godaddy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 9:28 AM
To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com>; Tan Tanaka, Dennis <dtantanaka@verisign.com>; Hazem Hezzah <hhezzah.las@gmail.com>; 'Don Hollander' <don.hollander@icann.org>
Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Programming Language Hacks - UA103
The RTL/LTR combo, yes, but not specific to a script. Am I missing something?
From:
Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 at 11:13 AM
To: Richard Merdinger <rmerdinger@godaddy.com>, Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, Hazem Hezzah <hhezzah.las@gmail.com>,
Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>
Cc: "ua-discuss@icann.org" <ua-discuss@icann.org>
Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Programming Language Hacks - UA103
Actually, we recently discovered an Edge bug (via the browser review) where the order of labels in a RTL.RTL.ASCII domain name were transposed during rendering. So I like calling
it out explicitly.
From:
ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Richard Merdinger
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:10 AM
To: Tan Tanaka, Dennis <dtantanaka@verisign.com>; Hazem Hezzah <hhezzah.las@gmail.com>; 'Don Hollander' <don.hollander@icann.org>
Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Programming Language Hacks - UA103
I agree; good comment, and I appreciate Hazem taking the time to share it.
From:
<ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via UA-discuss" <ua-discuss@icann.org>
Reply-To: Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 at 8:37 AM
To: Hazem Hezzah <hhezzah.las@gmail.com>, Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>
Cc: "ua-discuss@icann.org" <ua-discuss@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Programming Language Hacks - UA103
This is a fair comment. We probably need to use the LTR and RTL nomenclatures, which is the essence of those test cases. That also makes it generic for all RTL scripts, not only Arabic.
-Dennis
From:
<ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Hazem Hezzah <hhezzah.las@gmail.com>
Organization: LAS
Date: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 at 9:06 AM
To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>
Cc: "UA-discuss@icann.org" <ua-discuss@icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [UA-discuss] Programming Language Hacks - UA103
Hi Don,
I was just wondering why is Arabic considered different than
Unicode@idn.idn in EAIs?
Arabic characters are Unicode, and Arabic domain names are also IDN.
The only difference is the LTR and RTL reading order, which is probably done by the rendering part, but storing and validating is the same.
Regards,
Hazem Hezzah
From:
ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Don Hollander
Sent: Wednesday, 09 August, 2017 1:54
To: ua-discuss@icann.org
Subject: [UA-discuss] Programming Language Hacks - UA103
Thanks for the comments on an earlier edition of UA103 – especially from Tex, Jim & Dennis.
Please find a second version of the document – with some work still needed in the highlighted sections.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zahm4ZVS9lH9Zx8v-8PRhOnTV7fmEI8tStgLUBCkldA/edit?usp=sharing
Also attached as a PDF
Your comments would be most welcome indeed.
Thanks.
Don