Re: Biblical Hebrew (Was: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels)

From: John Cowan (
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 12:06:36 EDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Biblical Hebrew (Was: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels)"

    Philippe Verdy scripsit:

    > May be Unicode should be more prudent with Normalization Forms: if
    > new characters are added, their combining classes should be
    > documented as informative before there is a consensus and
    > experimentation. This will not break the stability pact with XML, which
    > will simply not accept the new characters before they are stabilized
    > by Unicode.

    XML has gone with a "preacceptance" approach. All possible Unicode
    characters in all 17 planes are already accepted as text, and most of them
    will be accepted (in XML 1.1) as name characters as well, pending Unicode
    actually creating them. The problem is that normalization can't deal
    with a known character whose CC is unknown -- unknown is the same as zero.

    > These potentially instable unicode-encoded documents will then
    > be labelled with the unicode version, as a future revision may
    > require verigying if the informative properties have become
    > enforcable.

    This is precisely the nightmare that we wish to avoid.

    John Cowan                         
            "You need a change: try Canada"  "You need a change: try China"
                    --fortune cookies opened by a couple that I know

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 12:39:03 EDT