Re: Security

[Glenn Maynard <g_lutf8@xxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 01:44:03PM +0900, Gaspar Sinai wrote:
> Which pretty much shows that there is an ambiguity and the
> algorithm should change. My argument would be: if it needs to be
> changed anyway can it be changed to make digital signatures easier
> and put scripts, like Old Hungarian (rovasiras) in it that can be
> written in both directions?

The Unicode standard and the standards concerning digital signatures are
separate.  Fixing Unicode doesn't imply any changes in signatures.

> I could not reach this level in my arguments because I was told
> that there  is no problem at all and I felt I have two choices:
> being violent or just silently unsubscribe from the list. I
> chose that latter.

You showed that there are problems with bidi rendering, and I don't think
anyone disagreed with that.  Your example was too contrived for people to
consider it a major problem.

(By the way, I don't think "violent" is the word you're looking for,
unless you think your first choice was to mailbomb the list or
something.  :)

-- 
Glenn Maynard
--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/