From: John Hudson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:18:15 EDT
At 01:45 PM 6/27/2003, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>I understand the frustration:
Similar to the frustration of having private, off-list messages replied to
> if Unicode had not attempted to define
>combining classes, which were not necessary to Unicode, all
>existing combining characters would have been given a CC=0
>(or all the same 220 or 230 value). This would have left the
>compatibility with legacy encodings and with Modern Hebrew,
>without breaking Traditional Hebrew.
Combining classes are useful and normalisation is a good thing that reduces
the number of possible encodings of equivalent character sequences. This is
very important and valuable during search and sort operations, and greatly
reduces processing time.
I have nothing at all against either normalisation or combining classes.
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Vancouver, BC email@example.com
If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores,
are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine,
who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint
Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.
- Umberto Eco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:58:07 EDT