Re: quick & dirty (but not too dirty) homograph defense
tedd <[email protected]> Sun, 20 Feb 2005 14:10:12 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.idn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <p06210208be3e8c4489eb@[192.168.0.101]> |
>tedd wrote: >>Case in point, the lower and upper case omega. Clearly the upper >>case omega would not be confused with any other glyph -- it's >>unique. Erik replied: >That may be true, but would the users like to see an upper case >omega in the middle of a name? Don't get me wrong -- I appreciate >the example -- but there are pros and cons to everything. That's a good point. But, given the "look-alike" problem, and comparing it to the possibility that an upper-case Omega may appear within a name, what's the "better" solution? You can't have both. I'm not arguing just for the Omega glyph (that's just an example), but rather I believe that there are more than a single glyph where its uppercase may present a better solution for a "look-alike" problem than it's lowercase counterpart. And, I am not proposing a mixed case solution for the IDN, but rather a single case for each code point. Granted, the vast majority of code points would remain lowercase, but a few uppercase exceptions may alleviate the "look-alike" problem. Just an idea. tedd -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://sperling.com/