Dear Madison, Dear Eliot, thanks for your suggestions. As for the conversion Latin --> Hebrew of the example date, we have probably used a wrong converter, so we agree to use the conversion you suggest. As for the rest, please find in-line our replies. Thanks!
Pierluigi and Enrico ________________________________ From: Madison Church <mchu...@staff.rfc-editor.org> Sent: 05 February 2025 18:28 To: Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) <rfc-...@rfc-editor.org>; ENRICO FRANCESCONI <enrico.francesc...@cnr.it>; pierluigi.spin...@gmail.com <pierluigi.spin...@gmail.com>; caterina.l...@gmail.com <caterina.l...@gmail.com> Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>; superu...@gmail.com <superu...@gmail.com>; auth48archive@rfc-editor.org <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9676 <draft-spinosa-urn-lex-24> for your review Hi Authors and Eliot, Thank you for your replies! Authors - To confirm, you are suggesting that the example be shown as the following (Removing the U+ notation and keeping the Hebrew format): (e.g., "September 2, 99" will be written in ISO plus Hebrew format as "1999-09-02|אלול,תשנ"ט.21"). Fine to remove the U+ format and keep the Hebrew format as in the example above (end of Section 3.6). Obviously, the right conversion into Hebrew characters (you suggest here below) is to be used. Please consider that in Section 3.6, all the occurrences of the example Hebrew date, in Hebrew, U+ and UTF-8 notations, have to be updated accordingly, so that they are all aligned with the new conversion you suggest. Please note that this calendar converter [1] translates 1999-09-02 to כ״א בֶּאֱלוּל תשנ״ט, and it does not use Arabic numerals nor punctuation in the translation. Please confirm the use of Arabic numerals and punctuation for the date-loc format. [1] https://www.hebcal.com/converter?gd=2&gm=9&gy=1999&g2h=1 Thank you, RFC Editor/mc > On Feb 2, 2025, at 1:38 PM, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) > <rfc-...@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > My view: > On 02.02.2025 19:52, ENRICO FRANCESCONI wrote: >> >> 1) to remove "date-loc" and keep only the ISO version of any date >> 2) to keep "date-loc" including, as example, a Hebrew date transformed into >> ISO latin characters (ex: 21.Elul,5759) >> 3) to keep "date-loc" including just the Unicode U+ version, without using >> Hebrew characters >> >> Please let us know what do you prefer and we proceed with the update of the >> document > I don't like any of these options because none of them provide an example > that people going left to right would actually use. I am also concerned > about Chinese, fwiw. > Eliot [cid:2b388357-cd4b-4982-94b5-5245b823c835] [facebook]<https://www.facebook.com/CNRsocialFB> [twitter] <https://twitter.com/CNRsocial_> [instagram] <https://www.instagram.com/cnrsocial/> [linkedin] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/283032> Enrico Francesconi CNR, INSTITUTE OF LEGAL INFORMATICS AND JUDICIAL SYSTEMS Research Director Tel. +390554399611 enrico.francesc...@cnr.it enrico.francesc...@igsg.cnr.it via de' Barucci, 20, 50127 – Florence (Italy) www.cnr.it<http://www.cnr.it/> Devolvi il 5×1000 al CNR CF 80054330586
-- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
