On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, G. Adam Stanislav wrote:
> Besides, I can just see the discussion here a couple of years down the road
> when we realize we need to impose some artificial boundary as to which
> fictional alphabet to include without having to go to 64 bits.
You are reducing the plausability of your argument below, which is totally
unrelated. There are about 4 interesting fictional alphabets to encode :
Shavian, Tengwar, Cirth, and Klingon. These add up to less than 500
codepoints. There is really no possibility of UTF-16 being filled, let
alone UCS-4! (Of these proposals : Shavian, Cirth, and Klingon are stable
and uncontroversial technically, but still have not gotten into the
standard!)
> Precisely. CH is a character in Slovak, no matter what any Anglocrat says.
I'm happy you feel that way. Can you answer the following questions?
* Is there a "ch" key on Slovak keyboards?
* If I enter "ch", and then press backspace would you want "c" or "" to
appear? What should happen if I enter "ch" and then press the left
arrow? Will it take the cursor to before the "h" or before the "c"?
* If so, can you see how this can be implemented even without allocating
a codepoint?
* Can you see that some mechanism to allow this to be done needs to exist anyway,
to deal with combining characters?
* If not, and it's just a sorting issue, why are you continuing to whine
about it, when proper English sorting is just as complicated?
* Why do you feel ISO8859-2 is adequate given it's lack of a "ch"
character?
* Define what you mean by "character", and why you think "ch" is one,
but, for example, "sl" isn't? Note : asserting "But it's a character"
or "It behaves like a character" without any justification is unlikely
to be useful.
-- Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:54 EDT