From: Patrick Andries (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Feb 12 2005 - 17:39:11 CST
Adam Twardoch a écrit :
> From: "Patrick Andries" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> In my mind, mixed scripts are suspicious (Basic Latin needed for the
>> ".com" and such is IMO script-neutral), but unmixed scripts (even
>> foreign) are perfectly okay if the user has mentioned that he can
>> read a language using that script. What could be needed then is some
>> logic to identify the scripts used in the domain name and link them
>> to languages.
> I agree:
> 2. Browsers should always warn about mixed-script URLs. Even if such
> domains may be valid from the IDN point of view, if the major browsers
> warn about them, people would be discouraged from registering such
> names for legitimate purposes (which is a negligible problem) and
> spoofing would be made more difficult.
[PA] I also think that implementing such warning for mixed-script URL
(IDN) would help simplify the spoofing problem and limit the confusable
character list anyone would maintain : only the confusable characters
within a script (and the generic characters such as basic a-z Latin,
digest and ponctuation) would have to be considered, not all characters
looking like a V and E across all scripts for example (Tifinagh is a new
one for example).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 12 2005 - 17:41:23 CST