[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Layer 2 and "idn identities" (was: Re: [idn] what are the IDN identifiers?)




On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 01:17:36 EST DougEwell2@cs.com writes:
> In a message dated 2001-12-04 20:11:19 Pacific Standard Time, 
> maynard@pobox.org.sg writes:
> 
> >> SC/TC equivalence itself is far simpler than the "four winds, two 
> eggs"
> >> equivalences, and has quite a bit of merit. I won't express any
> >> real opinion on it until I study it further.
> >
> > It is not so simple as to be able to be done _accurately_ by an 
> code-based1-1
> > bit-string matching process. There are semantic, syntactic and 
> contextual
> > considerations that require at the very least a morphological 
> analysis 
> process
> > in order for TC/SC to be done with a reasonable amount of accuracy 
> (i.e.
> > orthographically).
> 
> Thanks for saying with some authority what I have apparently been 
> unable to 
> communicate effectively, namely that TC/SC is not merely a 1-1 
> operation 
> comparable to Latin case folding.
> 
> -Doug Ewell
>  Fullerton, California
> 

Excuse me for jump in, I have been keep silent on this 
view,  and I'd like to comment on this issue now. 

TC/SC is not merely a 1-1 operation, if you only compare it 
with Latin case folding in what the names imply:

TC/SC is a subset of Han, and Han is subset of C,J,K.
Latin is a super set of English, French,....

Can you see the flaw on such a comparison?

So when you look at Latin in the context of UCS code points, 
since UCS is the set we are hoping to use blanketly in IDN,
then Latin is a subset of (Latin + Armenian + Cyrillic + Hebrew)
since I think this is the area that Latin is mostly likely be 
used too.  

So this means if you compare TC/SC set of 1-1 cases
then the  Latin is 1-1.

If you compare TC/SC with 1-n, n-1, 1-1, that is in Chinese, 
then Latin should be put into UCS Plane 0, 1, 2 too. 
So this Latin is n-1, 1-n too.

If you compare TC/SC in the sense of C,J,K block, 
then Latin + Armenian is the minimum case to think about.

Cheers.

Liana