[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: An argument against multiple character sets
- To: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Subject: Re: An argument against multiple character sets
- From: "Martin J. Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:10:10 +0900
- Cc: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Delivery-date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:52:36 -0800
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
At 11:10 00/01/27 -0800, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
> At 10:51 PM 1/27/00 +0900, Martin J. Duerst wrote:
> >I agree that far. But I think we have not only to say that we
> >have to deal with more than casing, we also have to say
> >what we think should be done (at least from an user perspective)
> >in each case.
>
> Then we are in agreement fully. I believe that the list must include at
> least casing
So you agree that we should require case-folding, at some point?
Or only that we have to make a decision for casing?
> and combining marks that look similar in typical glyphs (`, ',
> and _ come to mind).
Sorry, but you can't throw e.g. e-acute and e-grave into the same
equivalence class. The resulting system would be useless for French.
Regards, Martin.
#-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, World Wide Web Consortium
#-#-# mailto:duerst@w3.org http://www.w3.org