Re: Mixed up priorities

From: Robert Brady (
Date: Thu Oct 21 1999 - 21:25:51 EDT

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

> 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"
  * 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.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:54 EDT