IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names  
Home | Advertise on idnforums | Premium Membership

Go Back   IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names > IDN Discussions > General Discussion

General Discussion Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 01:21 PM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2029
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Firefox and IDNs

See here:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/IDN_Display_Algorithm
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 04:08 PM
Clotho's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 1458
Clotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

It looks like they finally may extract their cranium from their posterior.

"Need For Change
This strategy provides pretty good user protection, and it provides consistency - every Firefox everywhere works the same. However, it does mean that IDNs do not work at all in many TLDs, because the registry (for whatever reason) has not applied for inclusion, or because we do not think they have sufficiently strong protections in place. In addition, ICANN is about to open a large number of new TLDs. So either maintaining a whitelist is going to become burdensome, or the list will become wildly out of date and we will not be serving our users."


I hope they get it right. Is there any way to offer some guidance? Which browser do you think handles IDN's the best?
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 04:11 PM
Clotho's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 1458
Clotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

I spoke too fast:

Proposal
The plan is to augment our whitelist with something based on ascertaining whether all the characters in a label all come from the same script, or are from one of a limited and defined number of allowable combinations. The hope is that any intra-script near-homographs will be recognisable to people who understand that script.

We will retain the whitelist as well, because a) removing it might break some domains which worked previously, and b) if a registry submits a good policy, we have the ability to give them more freedom than the default restrictions do. So an IDN domain would be shown as Unicode if the TLD was on the whitelist or, if not, if it met the criteria above.


They are hopeless.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 04:24 PM
jose's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,719
iTrader: (49)
Rep Power: 5417
jose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nice
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clotho View Post
They are hopeless.
Indeed. Iron browser rules! (Chromium)

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-201012-201112
__________________
Looking for the perfect, still free .com domain name, for your next endeavor? Ask me. $5 only. Here's my most recent, 101th story of success: CarRealtime.com

Last edited by jose; 30th January 2012 at 04:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 04:39 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,495
iTrader: (65)
Rep Power: 2679
blastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Quote:
This system would permit whole-script confusables (All-Latin "scope.tld" vs all-Cyrillic "ѕсоре.tld"). However, so do the solutions of the other browsers, and it has not proved to be a significant problem so far. If there is a problem, every browser is equally affected.
So why bother having all this extra overhead at all?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 04:46 PM
Clotho's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 1458
Clotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

I registered at the wiki and I registered at mozilla but I haven't been able to figure out how to get the message to their dev's. The whitelist is a failure and the Firefox end user experience is piss poor for those using IDN's. They really need to fix this but it seems they are unable to get it through their head that Verisign isn't going to apply to their whitelist.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 05:53 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,495
iTrader: (65)
Rep Power: 2679
blastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Quote:
"This is obviously an unsatisfactory solution in the long term and it is hoped that a better fix can be developed in time for Firefox 1.1," the Mozilla Foundation said in its advisory. "For now, the Mozilla Foundation (and other browser vendors such as Opera Software) maintain that the problem is mostly the fault of domain name registries and registrars that let people register homographic variants of existing domain names."
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...g_defense.html

Last edited by blastfromthepast; 30th January 2012 at 05:53 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 05:58 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,495
iTrader: (65)
Rep Power: 2679
blastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enoughblastfromthepast will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Several bug reports complaining of FireFox failing on IDNs by displaying punycode have been filed:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585297
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=597355
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=542562

Also, because of FireFox's failure to implement IDNA2008, FireFox users going to meßdienst.de get sent to messdienst.de instead.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=479520

Last edited by blastfromthepast; 30th January 2012 at 06:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 10:15 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Golden West
Posts: 921
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 3243
Avtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the rough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clotho View Post
I spoke too fast:

Proposal
The plan is to augment our whitelist with something based on ascertaining whether all the characters in a label all come from the same script, or are from one of a limited and defined number of allowable combinations. The hope is that any intra-script near-homographs will be recognisable to people who understand that script.

We will retain the whitelist as well, because a) removing it might break some domains which worked previously, and b) if a registry submits a good policy, we have the ability to give them more freedom than the default restrictions do. So an IDN domain would be shown as Unicode if the TLD was on the whitelist or, if not, if it met the criteria above.


They are hopeless.
Clotho,

I think this is actually a pretty good proposal. I am wondering whether you misread it.

Take another look at the last sentence:

Quote:
So an IDN domain would be shown as Unicode if the TLD was on the whitelist or, if not, if it met the criteria above.
In other words, if the TLD is already on the whitelist (.de for example), then all URLs under that TLD will be shown in Unicode.

But if the TLD is not on the whitelist (.com for instance), then Firefox will apply the new algorithm. The new algorithm checks whether all characters in the label (second-level domain) are from the same script (or a group of scripts, such as Romaji + Kanji + Hiragana + Katakana); if so, the URL will be shown in Unicode.

All modern IDN second-level domains under .com satisfy the second criterion, so they will all be displayed as Unicode.

This is good! In fact, it is better (from our point of view) than Chrome and IE. Those two browsers require the user to select which languages to allow; for instance, if you don't select Russian (or another Cyrillic language) as an allowed language, all Cyrillic IDNs (from any TLD) will display as punycode in Chrome and IE. Firefox doesn't require the user to select allowed languages; it correctly displays all of them.

Or that's how I interpret the proposal, anyway.

Avtal
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 30th January 2012, 11:20 PM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7083
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avtal View Post
Or that's how I interpret the proposal, anyway.

Avtal
I see it the same way. It's definitively an improvement. Actually it's even better than Adwords' current IDN policy.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 31st January 2012, 01:37 AM
Clotho's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 1458
Clotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enough
Re: Firefox and IDNs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avtal View Post
Clotho,

I think this is actually a pretty good proposal. I am wondering whether you misread it.

Take another look at the last sentence:



In other words, if the TLD is already on the whitelist (.de for example), then all URLs under that TLD will be shown in Unicode.

But if the TLD is not on the whitelist (.com for instance), then Firefox will apply the new algorithm. The new algorithm checks whether all characters in the label (second-level domain) are from the same script (or a group of scripts, such as Romaji + Kanji + Hiragana + Katakana); if so, the URL will be shown in Unicode.

All modern IDN second-level domains under .com satisfy the second criterion, so they will all be displayed as Unicode.

This is good! In fact, it is better (from our point of view) than Chrome and IE. Those two browsers require the user to select which languages to allow; for instance, if you don't select Russian (or another Cyrillic language) as an allowed language, all Cyrillic IDNs (from any TLD) will display as punycode in Chrome and IE. Firefox doesn't require the user to select allowed languages; it correctly displays all of them.

Or that's how I interpret the proposal, anyway.

Avtal
I'll believe it when I see it. By your interpretation I don't see the need for the whitelist at all. I hope you are correct of course. Firefox in its current form is a blight on IDN's.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:48 AM.

Site Sponsors
Your ad here
buy t-shirt
מחיר הזהב

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright idnforums.com 2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54