From: Peter Kirk (peter.r.kirk@ntlworld.com)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 15:34:09 EDT
On 07/08/2003 07:27, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>On Thursday, August 07, 2003 2:40 AM, Doug Ewell <dewell@adelphia.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Kenneth Whistler <kenw at sybase dot com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>But I challenge you to find anything in the standard that
>>>*prohibits* such sequences from occurring.
>>>
>>>
>>I've learned that this question of "illegal" or "invalid" character
>>sequences is one of the main distinguishing factors between those who
>>truly understand Unicode and those who are still on the Road to
>>Enlightenment.
>>
>>...
>>
>If the term "valid" cannot be changed, then I suggest defining
>"conforming" for encoded text independantly of its validity (a
>"conforming text" would still need to use a "valid encoding").
>
>
>
>
As a very quick thought, maybe what we need is not restrictions to the
Unicode standard but a set of rules for each language or group of
languages, defining exactly how Unicode characters should be used to
write the words etc of that language. Such definitions might be
independent of the actual Unicode standard.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 16:08:21 EDT