From: John Cowan (jcowan@reutershealth.com)
Date: Wed Aug 06 2003 - 13:25:58 EDT
Peter Kirk scripsit:
> Really? It looks to me as if U+00B4 and U+02D8 to U+02DD have only a
> compatibility equivalences to space plus diacritic, and U+005E and
> U+0060 don't even have compatibility equivalences.
Indeed. The last two, BTW, are because the ASCII repertoire has taken
on a life of its own: ^ is not merely a spacing clone of COMBINING
CIRCUMFLEX, but has become a fully distinct character with many functions.
In particular, none of the Unicode canonical forms will affect text
written solely in the ASCII repertoire. "Every character has its
own story."
Someone asked about whether XML documents SHOULD or MUST be in NFC.
The answer is SHOULD, and this is formally applied only to the
not-yet-promulgated XML 1.1. XML documents *on the Web* SHOULD be in
NFC by reason of the W3C Character Model.
-- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com http://www.reutershealth.com "Not to know The Smiths is not to know K.X.U." --K.X.U.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 14:10:55 EDT