From: Arcane Jill (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Nov 28 2003 - 05:32:51 EST
You are getting personal and indulging in ad hominem. I consider this
out of order. Yes I have read TUS Section 2.2, and indeed the whole of
the rest of the book - and understood it, too, so you can stop wondering
that right now.
Unicode design principles do not change the fact that there are
inconsistencies within Unicode, and it is nice to have a forum in which
we can discuss such inconsistencies without being personally insulted.
The very fact that the character "circled 2" exists AT ALL is at odds
with Unicode design priniciples, as it should rightly have been encoded
as "2" + ENCLOSING CIRCLE. Or - alternatively - perhaps there should
have been no enclosing circle modifier (and no circle-enclosed glyphs)
at all, since enclosing circle should have been considered markup.
The fact is, whenever there is one rule in one place and a different
rule somewhere else, people are going to talk about it. I do not regard
this as a bad thing. I have disagreed with many people in this forum,
but I have never insulted anyone. I would like to believe that that is
how rational discussion proceeds.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew C. West [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:57 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Complex Combining
> Whenever I read threads like this one
> (and they resurface
> with monotonous regularity) I do wonder whether the
> participants have ever read
> TUS Section 2.2 "Unicode Design Principles".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 28 2003 - 06:11:34 EST