Re: [idn] Adding "optional" characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep

[James Seng <James@Seng.cc>]

Jonathan Rosenne wrote:
> 1. Not all fonts have them, there are other platforms, and CP1255 does not
> have all of the points.

Yes you are right. :-) ISO8859-8 only have the hebrew letters and CP1255
does not have the cantillation marks.

> 2. It says: "In the absence of more sophisticated behavior, for example
> tailored to the needs of a particular script or language".

This is my question. In other words, this is not a well-defined Hebrew
behavior which may be inconsistent across browser right? Maybe there are
some undocument rule on this for all hebrew browser?

If there is a doc which we can reference on this behavior, either from
W3C or Unicode, this would be great! If not, would be nice if someone
(hint hint) can document this down in an I-D etc.

-James Seng

> Jony
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Seng [mailto:James@Seng.cc]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 7:03 AM
> > To: Jonathan Rosenne
> > Cc: Paul Hoffman / IMC; idn@ops.ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [idn] Adding "optional" characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep
> >
> >
> > Hmm, correct me if I am wrong.
> >
> > By looking at ISO8859-8 & CP1255, it seem only CP1255 have the hebrew
> > 'points'. Hence, it is likely MS will have the IME & font for Hebrew
> > 'points'.
> >
> > If this is the case, it is not really 'undisplayable' anymore right?
> >
> > BTW, by reading this section of HTML specification, it seem that for any
> > undisplayable characters, you should either alert the user of the
> > missing character or represent it in the hexademical. Nothing in there
> > say you should just ignore the character.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
> >
> > -James Seng
> >
> > Jonathan Rosenne wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the relevant HTML 4 text:
> > >
> > > 5.4 Undisplayable characters
> > >
> > > A user agent may not be able to render all characters in a document
> > > meaningfully, for instance, because the user agent lacks a
> > suitable font, a
> > > character has a value that may not be expressed in the user
> > agent's internal
> > > character encoding, etc.
> > >
> > > Because there are many different things that may be done in
> > such cases, this
> > > document does not prescribe any specific behavior. Depending on the
> > > implementation, undisplayable characters may also be handled by the
> > > underlying display system and not the application itself. In
> > the absence of
> > > more sophisticated behavior, for example tailored to the needs of a
> > > particular script or language, we recommend the following
> > behavior for user
> > > agents:
> > >
> > > 1. Adopt a clearly visible, but unobtrusive mechanism to alert
> > the user of
> > > missing resources.
> > >
> > > 2. If missing characters are presented using their numeric
> > representation,
> > > use the hexadecimal (not decimal) form since this is the form used in
> > > character set standards
> > >
> > > Thus, the Israeli specification is conforming.
> > >
> > > Jony
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: James Seng [mailto:James@Seng.cc]
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 11:07 AM
> > > > To: Jonathan Rosenne
> > > > Cc: Paul Hoffman / IMC; idn@ops.ietf.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [idn] Adding "optional" characters in
> > draft-ietf-idn-nameprep
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jonathan Rosenne wrote:
> > > > > The Israeli standard for HTML takes a similar attitude - if
> > you cannot
> > > > > display them, just ignore them and don't display the unknown
> > > > character mark,
> > > > > but keep them in the data. This means that in links, the
> > user may not be
> > > > > aware of their existence, and so option b would cause considerable
> > > > > bewilderment.
> > > >
> > > > Is this part of the W3C standard? If so, is there any doc in W3C which
> > > > we can refer on this behavior of Hebrew? Martin?
> > > >
> > > > -James Seng