Case mapping errors?

From: John O'Conner (
Date: Wed Jun 21 2000 - 18:25:04 EDT

There are 5 characters that are giving me a little discomfort because of
their case mappings:

   * U+00B5 MICRO SIGN
   * U+2126 OHM SIGN

Each of these have case mappings...and I really don't understand why. It
appears that all of these have no "round-trip" capability to map back
from another case. I suppose this can be argued for a lot of mapppings.

The most difficult cases are 2126, 212A, and 212B. These characters are
"letter-like" in their glyph appearance, but it seems that their actual
semantics are not. It seems like someone may have looked at KELVIN SIGN
for example, decided it looked like a Latin-1 'K' and gave it the same
lowercase mapping. Still, would you really expect to lowercase a KELVIN
SIGN to a small 'k'. I can't imagine...but I may not be as imaginative
as some. I have the same argument for OHM SIGN and ANGSTROM SIGN.
Although they have case mappings, are they expected by most people? If I
were using the OHM, ANGSTROM, or KELVIN SIGN in my work, I would be very
surprised in a case operation changed them...maybe I would be
disappointed or frustrated even. Are these bugs in the spec? Or do I
just need to think about them a little differently?

Best regards,
John O'Conner

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:04 EDT