On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 10:52:53AM +0000, Andre Schappo wrote:
Just did a search - https://codepoints.net/search?q=full+stop and found several full stops characters used in different scripts.
Many of them aren't actually full stops, however, but contain "full stop" in their description. I hope we can agree, for instance, that U+0589 would be a bad idea to start mapping. UIs are not going to be competent at managing the entire list of possible full stops and the ways those mappings can go wrong, with is why RFC 5895 doesn't recommend "every full stop should just be mapped to U+002E".
A few years a go I did raise the issue for URLs of replacing ／ U+FF0F fullwidth solidus with / Solidus U+002F
But neither of these are permitted in LDH names to begin with. If you're making an argument about UIs for URLs, then you need to join the chorus decrying the state of IRIs (which turned out to be a terrible thing). I don't think this SG is anywhere close to being competent to recommending how to fix that series of terrible, terrible problems.
i18n is a well established numeronym. I propose a new numeronym: i15d meaning internationalized. Basically because I am getting fed up with typing internationalised😀
I've seen it used before, but it's not in RFC 6365. Perhaps a note to the authors :) A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com