From yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp Mon Jun 3 23:53:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C07FF21F9360 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 23:53:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.74 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.74 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eoHdDigLBPMW for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 23:52:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from off-send01.tyo.jprs.co.jp (off-send01.tyo.jprs.co.jp [IPv6:2001:df0:8:17::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A222121F9A7A for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 22:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from off-sendsmg01.tyo.jprs.co.jp (off-sendsmg01.tyo.jprs.co.jp [172.18.8.32]) by off-send01.tyo.jprs.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r545pN0m012067 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 14:51:25 +0900 X-AuditID: ac120820-b7f306d00000490a-11-51ad805b7ad1 Received: from NOTE550 (off-cpu04.tyo.jprs.co.jp [172.18.4.14]) by off-sendsmg01.tyo.jprs.co.jp (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 53.20.18698.B508DA15; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 14:51:23 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 14:51:19 +0900 From: Yoshiro YONEYA To: precis@ietf.org Message-Id: <20130604145119.10024f8348383ec66489a6ac@jprs.co.jp> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.3.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrGIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWyRoiFTze6YW2gwbEv6ha7vv9hdWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxrKZ61gKNrFWHHs3nbWBcRtLFyMnh4SAicTRZ22sELaYxIV7 69m6GLk4hASOM0r0PNjLDJJgEVCROHxiNVgDm4CBxK9lv5lAbBEBYYlbtxeCNQsLGEn0HJwO VsMr4CDx7M81NoihFhIXmjrYuxg5gOKCEn93CIOEmQW0JB7+usUCYctLbH87h3kCI88shKpZ SKpmIalawMi8ilEmPy1Ntzg1L6U4N93AUK+kMl8vq6CoWC8ZRG9iBAcLh8IOxhmnDA4xCnAw KvHw1mxbEyjEmlhWXJl7iFGSg0lJlHdbydpAIb6k/JTKjMTijPii0pzU4kOMEhzMSiK8vS5A Od6UxMqq1KJ8mJQ0B4uSOO/xszv8hATSE0tSs1NTC1KLYLIyHBxKErwr6oEaBYtS01Mr0jJz ShDSTBycIMN5gIb3gdTwFhck5hZnpkPkTzFKSonzKoAkBEASGaV5cL2vGMWBXhDmvQKS5QFG PlzXK6CBTEADJ79eBTKwJBEhJdXAWLal4nvJzSeb7mq4mK0wLtkZt3tuL/85hu5DO2p8eRY4 uN2SuHCIQ8CwtOTsz/datjIFCblC29LPme/87VDYfIJdaVuq3tPbh+LOJwg/dXnwRtkmwjqx e3YKg4FDybTgFu9Zhxd4Wq5qz3zsUr17acXaojPhh923PRONSFaVtf0ffpDjisBOJZbijERD Leai4kQAOWvZP7kCAAA= Subject: [precis] Call for review: draft-ietf-radext-nai-03 X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 06:53:10 -0000 Dear WG members, The RADEXT WG has started 2 weeks WGLC for draft-ietf-radext-nai-03 on Jun 4th. The document is for updateing RFC 4282 (The Network Access Identifier) and addressing internationalization of identifiers. The document isn't using PRECIS Framework at now, but it can be a PRECIS customer candidate. Would someone please volunteer to review the document and give your comments to RADEXT mailing list in conjunction with this mailing list? Your comments will help progress both of RADEXT WG and our WG. Regards, -- Yoshiro YONEYA as co-chair From alexey.melnikov@isode.com Mon Jun 10 03:09:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7761121F8B90 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 03:09:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yJxvM0nXDdpL for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 03:09:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from waldorf.isode.com (cl-125.lon-03.gb.sixxs.net [IPv6:2a00:14f0:e000:7c::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AA5721F8AC2 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 03:09:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1370858981; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=jQLKrw9vDsQc3vZQeoey6rcu1PNtE0pk3PwC9ylCnKc=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=JMF1orxB4l6xmuQjFLJtW9+8vTAMdZkY2Mw2u+Tx8FopjMVAIPiqXbDvDeohpQSoMvAJ+v 6R0GQJ5gWbi3nAIVyf7u88Tp1rkhP0p4yukc6o4y+7sUqMOhEeQda5Z1FtGlDsJJbHf+rF rd6Dp4Avm6uJQg9282rjgUTno5EHTEo=; Received: from [172.16.1.29] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:09:41 +0100 Message-ID: <51B5A5E3.5080608@isode.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:09:39 +0100 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 To: Yoshiro YONEYA References: <20130604145119.10024f8348383ec66489a6ac@jprs.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <20130604145119.10024f8348383ec66489a6ac@jprs.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: precis@ietf.org Subject: Re: [precis] Call for review: draft-ietf-radext-nai-03 X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:09:49 -0000 On 04/06/2013 06:51, Yoshiro YONEYA wrote: > Dear WG members, > > The RADEXT WG has started 2 weeks WGLC for draft-ietf-radext-nai-03 > on Jun 4th. > The document is for updateing RFC 4282 (The Network Access Identifier) > and addressing internationalization of identifiers. The document isn't > using PRECIS Framework at now, but it can be a PRECIS customer candidate. > > Would someone please volunteer to review the document and give your > comments to RADEXT mailing list in conjunction with > this mailing list? Your comments will help progress both of RADEXT WG > and our WG. Hi, I've reviewed the document yesterday. What kind of comments do you think should be reported to radext@ietf.org? As you pointed out, it is not using the PRECIS framework. Best Regards, Alexey From aland@deployingradius.com Mon Jun 10 06:18:59 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6AD521F90CC for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 06:18:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kr0jul-LlWXo for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 06:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from power.freeradius.org (power.freeradius.org [88.190.25.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E800B21F8BE6 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 06:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCED522410CE; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:17:53 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at power.freeradius.org Received: from power.freeradius.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (power.freeradius.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9RtgrjwojU8y; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:17:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Thor-2.local (bas1-ottawa11-1176224452.dsl.bell.ca [70.27.194.196]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8696822405C5; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:17:52 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <51B5D200.5020200@deployingradius.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 09:17:52 -0400 From: Alan DeKok User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Melnikov References: <20130604145119.10024f8348383ec66489a6ac@jprs.co.jp> <51B5A5E3.5080608@isode.com> In-Reply-To: <51B5A5E3.5080608@isode.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: precis@ietf.org Subject: Re: [precis] Call for review: draft-ietf-radext-nai-03 X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 13:18:59 -0000 Alexey Melnikov wrote: > I've reviewed the document yesterday. What kind of comments do you think > should be reported to radext@ietf.org? As you pointed out, it is not > using the PRECIS framework. Author here. Does it make sense from an i18n perspective? Does it incorrectly describe i18n issues, concepts, practices, etc.? Can it be improved? The document tries to standardize a user identifier which is 118n compatible. The goal (eventually) is to suggest that protocols should use one identifier format, instead of each protocol inventing it's own. For example, it's possible now to have one "authentication" session in 802.1X contain 3 independent identifiers. They don't even have to be in the same character encoding. This makes it difficult to determine just who the heck is being authenticated. Alan DeKok. From stpeter@stpeter.im Wed Jun 26 20:15:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F33D11E80F8 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:15:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1at4vNN3NiSA for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0078511E80F4 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [71.237.13.154]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF0FC412F9; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:15:25 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51CBAE35.4050303@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:15:01 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: precis@ietf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [precis] algorithm order (esp. HasCompat) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 03:15:10 -0000 I've made good progress on some Python code for generating the PRECIS codepoint table. While working on the HasCompat part of the code today, it struck me that our current algorithm for calculation of the derived property might be wrong: If .cp. .in. Exceptions Then Exceptions(cp); Else If .cp. .in. BackwardCompatible Then BackwardCompatible(cp); Else If .cp. .in. Unassigned Then UNASSIGNED; Else If .cp. .in. ASCII7 Then PVALID; Else If .cp. .in. JoinControl Then CONTEXTJ; Else If .cp. .in. PrecisIgnorableProperties Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. Controls Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. OldHangulJamo Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. LetterDigits Then PVALID; Else If .cp. .in. OtherLetterDigits Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. Spaces Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. Symbols Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. Punctuation Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. HasCompat Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else DISALLOWED; In particular, I don't think we can check the HasCompat rule last, because that will allow too many codepoints to be accepted in the IdentifierClass. Instead, I think it needs to be before LetterDigits in the order of operations. Here are a few examples to back up my claim. Consider the first codepoint that has a compatibility equivalent: 00AA;FEMININE ORDINAL INDICATOR;Ll;0;L; 0061;;;;N;;;;; If LetterDigits is checked before HasCompat, this character (which is a superscript version of LATIN SMALL LETTER A) would be allowed in the Identifier Class. Or consider 00BC: 00BC;VULGAR FRACTION ONE QUARTER;No;0;ON; 0031 2044 0034;;;1/4;N;FRACTION ONE QUARTER;;;; If OtherLetterDigits is checked before HasCompat, this character (¼) would be allowed in the IdentifierClass. There are many more examples. Unless I'm horribly mistaken, the order of checking in the algorithm needs to be corrected. I propose: If .cp. .in. Exceptions Then Exceptions(cp); Else If .cp. .in. BackwardCompatible Then BackwardCompatible(cp); Else If .cp. .in. Unassigned Then UNASSIGNED; Else If .cp. .in. ASCII7 Then PVALID; Else If .cp. .in. JoinControl Then CONTEXTJ; Else If .cp. .in. PrecisIgnorableProperties Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. Controls Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. OldHangulJamo Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. HasCompat Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. LetterDigits Then PVALID; Else If .cp. .in. OtherLetterDigits Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. Spaces Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. Symbols Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. Punctuation Then SAFE_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else DISALLOWED; (And yes, "SAFE_DIS" needs to be changed to "ID_DIS"...) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ From t.nemo10@kmd.keio.ac.jp Thu Jun 27 01:04:25 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1D421F9C79 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:04:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kP6qKegNIxLr for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.kmd.keio.ac.jp (mail.kmd.keio.ac.jp [IPv6:2001:200:167:2e90::164]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D8FE21F9C73 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2001:200:167:2ec1:589f:e91a:e100:c2a9] (unknown [IPv6:2001:200:167:2ec1:589f:e91a:e100:c2a9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kmd.keio.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C4A6B8048F for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 17:04:21 +0900 (JST) From: Takahiro Nemoto Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7DCFE1E0-98AF-49D8-AAED-08262C9C3145" Message-Id: Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 17:04:20 +0900 To: "precis@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Subject: [precis] Mappings document's open issues X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:04:25 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7DCFE1E0-98AF-49D8-AAED-08262C9C3145 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dear all, Yoneya-san and I updated open issues raised on mailing list in = draft-ietf-precis-mappings-02. Please read and let us know your comments/suggestions. =46rom PRECIS WG ML: Some protocols require local case mapping according to the normative of = the PRECIS framework. Below are the current mappings document's open issues. 1. Is it necessary to move the local case mapping in the framework = document? - The local case mapping is for localizaion and the PRECIS framework = is for internationalization. And our proposal is as follows. Guidelines regarding mappings including localization that make PRECIS = framework=20 more effective should be given in the mappings document. Regards, Nemo -- Takahiro Nemoto t.nemo10@kmd.keio.ac.jp= --Apple-Mail=_7DCFE1E0-98AF-49D8-AAED-08262C9C3145 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Dear = all,

Yoneya-san and I updated open issues = raised on mailing list in = draft-ietf-precis-mappings-02.
Please read and let us know = your comments/suggestions.

=46rom PRECIS = WG ML:
Some protocols require local case mapping according to = the normative of the PRECIS framework.

Below = are the current mappings document's open issues.
1. = Is it necessary to move the local case mapping in the framework = document?
  - The local case mapping is for localizaion = and the PRECIS framework is for = internationalization.

And our proposal is as = follows.
Guidelines regarding mappings including = localization that make PRECIS framework 
more = effective should be given in the mappings = document.


Regards,
Nemo
--
Takahiro = Nemoto
<= /div>
= --Apple-Mail=_7DCFE1E0-98AF-49D8-AAED-08262C9C3145-- From stpeter@stpeter.im Thu Jun 27 05:29:01 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5CF21F9CDD for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 05:29:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FG2rE5dPni0M for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 05:28:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEEBD21F9C03 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 05:28:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [71.237.13.154]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5DEAC412FB; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 06:29:17 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51CC3006.5050906@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 06:28:54 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Takahiro Nemoto References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "precis@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [precis] Mappings document's open issues X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:29:01 -0000 On 6/27/13 2:04 AM, Takahiro Nemoto wrote: > Dear all, > > Yoneya-san and I updated open issues raised on mailing list in > draft-ietf-precis-mappings-02. > Please read and let us know your comments/suggestions. > > From PRECIS WG ML: > Some protocols require local case mapping according to the normative of > the PRECIS framework. > > Below are the current mappings document's open issues. > 1. Is it necessary to move the local case mapping in the framework document? > - The local case mapping is for localizaion and the PRECIS framework > is for internationalization. > > And our proposal is as follows. > Guidelines regarding mappings including localization that make PRECIS > framework > more effective should be given in the mappings document. I think it's fine to leave these in the mapping document. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ From stpeter@stpeter.im Thu Jun 27 12:32:15 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B1B11E80DF for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:32:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n0b7j0AraWvW for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:32:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B28321F9ED4 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sjc-vpn3-816.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.239.233]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99D8D4130F; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:32:28 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51CC9332.9090903@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:32:02 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "precis@ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [precis] another ordering question X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 19:32:16 -0000 While reviewing and checking the codepoint table based on some Python code I've been writing, I noticed that under our current order both of the following codepoints are categorized as PrecisIgnorableProperties rather than OldHangulJamo: 115F;HANGUL CHOSEONG FILLER;Lo;0;L;;;;;N;;;;; 1160;HANGUL JUNGSEONG FILLER;Lo;0;L;;;;;N;;;;; That's because our order of operations is: Else If .cp. .in. PrecisIgnorableProperties Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. Controls Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. OldHangulJamo Then DISALLOWED; Although both rules result in a status of DISALLOWED at this time for our current string classes, it seems better to apply the OldHangulJamo rule before the PrecisIgnorableProperties rule. Thoughts? Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/