Well, one way would be the annotations.
Personally speaking, I cannot imagine why on earth an implementation should
ever care what the name of a character is. But obviously there were some
core implementations that decided they needed to care and thus we are stuck
with this rule.
So how about we use another tack (to borrow a sailing term).
As many people know, the names can be translated. This has been done for
French and I heard there were people doing it for German, too. Obviously
there is nothing to stop them from fixing bugs as they go, after all this is
just helpful, informational stuff and not something normative.
So why not treat this official name as "language neutral" and then have a
set of English names that would be mostly the same but would fix all these
darn issues. Since its informative and implementations would be instructed
that it CAN change in response to bug fixes, we could change the little
bugger when we found out that the original name was somehow wrong.
Just a random thought, but it does not seem to be an idea that would violate
any of the stability guarantees. It would address John's concern below, as
well.
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc.
http://www.trigeminal.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "John O'Conner" <john.oconner@eng.sun.com>
To: "Unicode List" <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: Property error for U+2118?
> Thanks for the replies everyone. I do appreciate them.
>
> As a side note...
>
> It's interesting how we find ways to get around rules that bother us.
Instead of
> moving, removing, or renaming the character, we simply say everything
about it
> is incorrect except its new properties. At the same time, we wink and tell
each
> other that SCRIPT CAPITAL P is *really* the Weierstrass symbol.
>
> In all seriousness, how would anyone implementing the Unicode standard
know all
> the unwritten conventions and quirks...like this idea about SCRIPT CAPITAL
P
> being something else entirely. This obviously isn't the only oddity, so
what
> resources does one have to find out these quirks other than stories and
comments
> passed along via mailing lists. If I had read the Unicode Standard more
closely,
> would I have found this?
>
> Regards,
> John O'Conner
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:18 EDT