Martijn, Thank you for your reply. We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 page for this document (https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9639) and will publish this document shortly.
Thank you for your careful review. RFC Editor/ar > On Dec 17, 2024, at 10:33 PM, Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Alice, > > Many thanks! It seems to me the issue has to do with whether or not a > line starts with a Hebrew or Latin character. By removing some text, > the second line no longer starts with a Hebrew character, so the line > is typeset left-to-right instead of right-to-left. But you probably > figured that out already. > > Anyway, the document looks good to me, I approve of publication. > > Kind regards, Martijn van Beurden > > Op di 17 dec 2024 om 23:07 schreef Alice Russo <aru...@amsl.com>: >> >> Martijn, >> Thank you for pointing this out. This issue in the PDF has been corrected; >> please see https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.pdf (page 62). >> >> The fix (to get the PDF to match the TXT and HTML) involved incrementally >> updating the XML source file to pinpoint when the bug rears its head, and >> then deleting the words "as follows" (this minor change is visible in the >> last diff file, which shows only the most recent changes to the text file): >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-lastrfcdiff.html >> >> The files are here: (please refresh) >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.txt >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.pdf >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.xml >> >> All changes from the approved I-D: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >> >> Please confirm before we continue the publication process. For more >> specificity, screenshots are available below. >> >> Thank you. >> RFC Editor/ar >> -- >> >> Before the fix (HTML vs. PDF - they do not match): >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639_p62_before.png >> >> After the fix (HTML vs. PDF - they match): >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639_p62_after.png >> >>> On Dec 12, 2024, at 7:00 AM, Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sandy, >>> >>> Looking it this one more time, it seems the PDF still doesnt render >>> correctly. In the spelling out with all the code points, it seems the >>> characters are spelled out right to left instead of left to right. The PDF >>> differs from the HTML and TXT in this respect. >>> >>> The HTML says somelike like >>> >>> where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters forming the field >>> content is as follows: character 1, character 2, character 3, character 4. >>> >>> The PDF says something like this: >>> >>> where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters forming the field >>> content is as follows: character 3, character 2, character 1, character 4. >>> >>> This seems like a tooling issue. >>> >>> Kind regards, Martijn van Beurden >>> >>> Op do 12 dec 2024 08:43 schreef Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com>: >>> Hi Sandy, >>> >>> This looks great, I approve. Many thanks for incorporating, and improving >>> on, my suggestion. >>> >>> Kind regards, Martijn van Beurden >>> >>> >>> Op do 12 dec 2024 00:36 schreef Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@amsl.com>: >>> Hi Martijn, >>> >>> Thank you for your review. We have updated the document and posted the >>> files here for your review: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.xml >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.txt >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.pdf >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.html >>> >>> Diffs of most recent updates only: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-lastdiff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-lastrfcdiff.html >>> >>> AUTH48 diff: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-auth48diff.html >>> >>> Comprehensive diffs: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-diff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-rfcdiff.html >>> >>> Please review and let us know if updates are needed or if you approve the >>> RFC for publication. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> RFC Editor/sg >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Dec 7, 2024, at 4:05 AM, Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Op vr 6 dec 2024 om 22:33 schreef Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@amsl.com>: >>>>> >>>>> While troubleshooting, we were advised not to mix LTR and RTL scripts >>>>> within the same <t> element and to include explanatory text that uses the >>>>> <u> element. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I can see why this is problematic. For that very same reason it is >>>> very useful as an example of course. Thank you for taking the time to >>>> address this. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> We have updated the file to be more similar to RFC 9290 (which also uses >>>>> “שלום") — "TITLE=שלום” now appears in artwork and is followed by the >>>>> following explanatory text: >>>>> >>>>> where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters is: >>>>> "ש" (HEBREW LETTER SHIN, U+05E9), "ל" (HEBREW LETTER LAMED, U+05DC), >>>>> "ו" (HEBREW LETTER VAV, U+05D5), "ם" (HEBREW LETTER FINAL MEM, U+05DD). >>>>> >>>> >>>> While this explains the part in Hebrew, it omits the Latin part. I >>>> think this should be noted. I propose the following change >>>> >>>> OLD: >>>> where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters is >>>> >>>> NEW: >>>> where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters forming the >>>> field content is >>>> >>>> I am not entirely sure whether 'forming the field content' is the best >>>> possible phrasing here. Feel free to propose something else, I just >>>> think that it is useful to mention that this 'spelling out' concerns >>>> the field content, not the field name nor the separator (see section >>>> 8.6 for details on these terms) >>>> >>>> I hope this proposal isn't too much trouble. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> Martijn van Beurden >>>> >>> >> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
