From: Peter Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Nov 25 2003 - 11:06:01 EST
On 25/11/2003 07:22, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>Composition exclusions have a lower impact as well as the relative orders of
>canonical classes, as they don't affect canonical equivalence of strings,
>and thus won't affect applications based on the Unicode C10 definition; they
>are important only to allow binary compares of normalized strings.
Thanks for the clarification. My point is that binary compares of
normalised strings are possible only if the strings have not been
transformed according to C10 since normalisation; and that the need to
support such binary compares has been used as a justification for a
refusal to correct errors in the Unicode combining classes.
-- Peter Kirk email@example.com (personal) firstname.lastname@example.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 25 2003 - 11:51:48 EST