From: Peter Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Apr 03 2005 - 13:15:58 CST
On 03/04/2005 17:27, Doug Ewell wrote:
>There's also a significant controversy surrounding the ability of some
>evil person to register "paypaɫ.com" or similar, using a letter like
>U+026B that most people in the world aren't aware exists, ...
The standard should not pander to ignorance. Don't forget that there are
billions of Chinese, Indians etc who are not familiar even with our
>... and using it
>to dupe innocent consumers. People are running around screaming that
>internationalized domain names are evil for allowing these characters,
>and that Unicode is evil for including them in the first place. This
>"security" thread is an attempt to work out the best solution for all.
I see the point. But if we are going to allow U+0142 to support Polish,
and so to allow anyone to register "paypał.com", then there is not much
difference allowing them to use "paypaɫ.com", with U+026B. Perhaps
U+0142 and U+026B can be listed as lookalikes. Actually, does anyone
want U+026B? This is not a click. Perhaps you were thinking of U+01C2.
-- Peter Kirk email@example.com (personal) firstname.lastname@example.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 01/04/2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 03 2005 - 13:17:13 CST