[discuss] IDNA and Arabic (and other RTL scripts)

Patrik Fältström paf at frobbit.se
Tue Mar 18 19:57:35 UTC 2014

Let me phrase this differently: The bidirectional rules in IDNA2008 are
_very_ well thought through and works. In writing systems of both
directionalities. But that is also why some of the rules are so


On 2014-03-18 17:43, Dominique Lacroix wrote:
> Thanks Andrew and Patrik.
> The complexity you describe reminds me the story of the Procrustean Bed ;-)
> And mixing directionalities reminds the boustrophedon script that was
> the sign of transitional writing systems.
> It's not a criticism, but only an observation. A system conceived and
> largely yet implemented in left-to-right is difficult to transform into
> right-to-left.
> @+, cheers, Dominique
> Le 18/03/14 16:49, Patrik Fältström a écrit :
>> On 2014-03-18 14:53, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>> For most users, I think the most natural way to
>>> write a name in analogy with the current use is something like this:
>>>     [TLD].[2LD].[3LD].[4LD]
>> The order of the tokens I claim depends on within what directionality
>> the over all writing context is. If that is right to left, the TLD will
>> be the leftmost token. If it is left to right the TLD will be to the
>> left. Then you on top of that will have a directionality of the
>> characters within each one of the tokens that creates the domain name.
>>    Patrik
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 291 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140318/2d2269ec/signature.asc>

More information about the discuss mailing list