Internet DRAFT - draft-nemoto-precis-alternativenames
draft-nemoto-precis-alternativenames
Network Working Group T. Nemoto
Internet-Draft D. Wang
Intended status: Standards Track Keio University
Expires: April 30, 2015 October 27, 2014
Preparation and Comparison of Customized Alternative Names
draft-nemoto-precis-alternativenames-00
Abstract
This document describes how to prepare and compare Unicode strings
representing to customized alternative names for devices, which can
be created and accessed by users definition, primarily as used within
IoT environment like appliances controlling through home network.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 30, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Nemoto & Wang Expires April 30, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft precis mapping October 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Differences from other PRECIS Profile . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Reuse of PRECIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Reuse of Unicode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Visually Similar Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
1.1. Overview
In our daily life, users always using their mother language to create
alternative names for devices (eg. PC or game machine), those
alternative names will be different from the model number of those
devices. Many users are naming their devices with such nicknames of
internationalized strings. These strings have very high flexibility
by using various of characters sets. For example, symbols like the
Tilde mark ("WAVE DASH"(U+301C) it's not "FULLWIDTH TILDE"(U+FF5E))
in Japanese, which is used instead of the "KATAKANA-HIRAGANA
PROLONGED SOUND MARK"(U+30FC), has being used as product names or
part of adjective words in many kinds of fields. In the Internet
environment especially for IoT devices, nicknames like this may be
given to device or as part of the device name. To look up the
devices by the names registered in database, it is necessary to take
more appropriate and flexible preparation. So that it could be more
compatible for any assumed character that provided by different input
methods of applications.
To increase the matching possibility that customized device
alternative names described as above can be utilized correctly as
internet resources, this document defines rules for preparing and
comparing customized alternative names for devices, so that the
accuracy of comparison result between alternative names strings could
be improved.
Nemoto & Wang Expires April 30, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft precis mapping October 2014
1.2. Differences from other PRECIS Profile
TBD.
1.3. Terminology
Many important terms used in this document are defined in
[I-D.ietf-precis-framework] and [Unicode]. The key words "MUST",
"MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
"RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. Rules
A alternative name MUST NOT be zero bytes in length. This rule is to
be enforced after any mapping or normalization of code points.
A alternative name MUST consist only of Unicode code points that
conform to the "FreeformClass" base string class defined in
[I-D.ietf-precis-framework].
For preparation purposes, an application MUST only ensure that the
string conforms to the "FreeformClass" base string class defined in
[I-D.ietf-precis-framework]; however, it MAY also perform the mapping
and normalization operations specified below for comparison.
For comparison purposes, an application MUST treat a alternative name
as follows, where the operations specified MUST be completed in the
order shown:
1. Fullwidth and halfwidth characters MUST be mapped to their
decomposition equivalents.
2. Additional mappings MAY be applied, such as those defined in
[I-D.ietf-precis-framework] and [I-D.ietf-precis-mappings]. In
the Additional Mappings, the rules of adapted Special Mapping are
as below:
1. Non-ASCII space characters from the "N" category defined
under Section 7.14 of [I-D.ietf-precis-framework] MUST be
mapped to U+0020 SPACE.
2. Interior sequences of more than one ASCII space character
MUST be mapped to a single ASCII space character.
3. Leading and trailing whitespace MUST be removed.
Nemoto & Wang Expires April 30, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft precis mapping October 2014
3. Uppercase and titlecase characters MUST be mapped to their
lowercase equivalents using Unicode Default Case Folding. Local
Case Mapping is applicable alternatively.
4. Unicode Normalization Form C (NFC) MUST be applied to all
characters.
With regard to directionality, the "Bidi Rule" provided in [RFC5893]
applies.
3. Security Considerations
3.1. Reuse of PRECIS
The security considerations described in [I-D.ietf-precis-framework]
apply to the "FreeformClass" base string class used in this document
for alternative names, respectively.
3.2. Reuse of Unicode
The security considerations described in [UTR39] apply to the use of
Unicode characters in alternative names.
3.3. Visually Similar Characters
[[I-D.ietf-precis-framework] describes some of the security
considerations related to visually similar characters, also called
"confusable characters" or "confusables". Although the mapping rules
under Section 2 are designed in part to reduce the possibility of
confusion about alternative names, this document does not yet provide
more detailed recommendations regarding the handling of visually
similar characters, such as those in [UTR39]. However, a future
version of this document might provide such recommendations.
4. IANA Considerations
The IANA shall add the following entry to the PRECIS Profiles
Registry:
Name: Alternative Names FreeformClass.
Applicability: TBD.
Base Class: FreeformClass.
Replaces: None.
Width Mapping: Map fullwidth and halfwidth characters to their
decomposition mappings.
Additional Mappings: Map non-ASCII space characters to ASCII space,
map interior sequences of multiple space characters to a single ASCII
space, strip leading and trailing space characters.
Nemoto & Wang Expires April 30, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft precis mapping October 2014
Case Mapping: For comparison purposes, map uppercase and titlecase
characters to lowercase using Unicode Default Case Folding. Local
Case Mapping is applicable alternatively.
Normalization: NFC.
Directionality: The "Bidi Rule" defined in RFC 5893 applies.
Exclusions: None.
Enforcement: To be specified by applications.
Specification: RFC XXXX.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-precis-framework]
Saint-Andre, P. and M. Blanchet, "PRECIS Framework:
Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in
Application Protocols", draft-ietf-precis-framework-18
(work in progress), September 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5893] Alvestrand, H. and C. Karp, "Right-to-Left Scripts for
Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 5893, August 2010.
[Unicode] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
7.0.0", <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode7.0.0/>,
2014.
[UTR39] The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Technical Report #39:
Unicode Security Mechanisms",
<http://unicode.org/reports/tr39/>, September 2014.
5.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-precis-mappings]
Yoneya, Y. and T. Nemoto, "Mapping characters for PRECIS
classes", draft-ietf-precis-mappings-08 (work in
progress), June 2014.
Authors' Addresses
Nemoto & Wang Expires April 30, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft precis mapping October 2014
Takahiro Nemoto
Keio University
Graduate School of Media Design
4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku
Yokohama, Kanagawa 223-8526
Japan
Phone: +81 45 564 2517
Email: t.nemo10@kmd.keio.ac.jp
Daniel Wang
Keio University
Graduate School of Media Design
4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku
Yokohama, Kanagawa 223-8526
Japan
Phone: +81 45 564 2517
Email: daniel.wang@kmd.keio.ac.jp
Nemoto & Wang Expires April 30, 2015 [Page 6]
