Peter Westlake wrote:
> Kolbjørn Aambø@unicode.org wrote:
> > Would not something like:
> > Aa:á:Àà:â:Ãã:Ææ:Ää:Åå,Bb,Cc:Çç,Dd,Ee:Ééèêë,Ff,Gg,Hh,
> > I:¡iíìîï,Jj,Kk,Ll,Mm,Nn:Ññ,O
> > o:óòô:Õõ:‘¦:Øø:Öö,Pp,Qq,Rr,Ss,Tt,Uu:úùû,Vv,Ww,Xx,Yy:Üü,Zz.
> > be apropriate for english searching?
> Yes. In fact, that could be the value of the ordered equivalence
> class for letters in English, except that I think you are including
> extra information about how letters sort within each class.
How's that again? The Y to Ü equivalence would seem to be
purely Nordic, certainly not English. English would probably
expect to see Ü collate with U.
But then see my .sig for the pitfalls of such reasoning!
-- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan email@example.com You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (FW 16.5)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:39 EDT