I saw that you responded to the mozilla ticket.  Thank you for taking
the time to do this.

I understand that the visual ae issue or other ligature type
combinations were not considered in the very good work that you did in
the efforts with NASK to be a variant, and I have also heard from
Denic about the manner in which a similar circumstance exists with the
sharp s character.

I think personally that I have heard compelling anecdotal descriptions
that justify the case where there could and rightly should be two
separate websites for two separate domains with two separate meanings.

There are also crafty entrepreneurial participants on the internet
that don't always have the best interest of the end user in mind who
could leverage the visual similarity between the strings in a manner
that is arguably bad for the end-user, either in a confusing manner or
in some cases worse.

There is always ongoing discussion about the evolution of 'doing the
right thing' with Mozilla as far as the approach taken with addressing
visual variations.  The objective is to ensure the least end-user
confusion.

Without saying it is right or wrong how some software behaves in the
presence of ligature or other visual variants that split one character
into more than one, I think for the purposes and context of VIP
simply exposing those as distinct variant types.

Let's simply document this as a type of variant.

This is was what the context and intent of my mention was.