Re: Umlaut and Tréma, was: Variation sele ctors and vowel marks

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Wed Jul 14 2004 - 15:18:56 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Umlaut and Tréma, was: Variation sele ctors and vowel marks"

    Kenneth Whistler <kenw at sybase dot com> wrote:

    >> So I must agree with Doug that
    >> "CGJ + COMBINING DIAERESIS is a hack".
    > It is simply a way to maintain a distinction needed for German
    > bibliographic data to behave as required, while representing
    > their data in Unicode. Call it a hack if you like, but it
    > satisfied the relevant parties as an appropriate means for
    > representing the data in question.

    Maybe "kludge" would have been a less pejorative term. It's a novel use
    of an existing mechanism to solve a problem that had not been thought of

    >> 256 variation selectors won't do if they have all been defined
    >> unchangeably with the wrong properties e.g combining class. On the
    >> other hand, if the UTC is prepared to ignore the combining class and
    >> normalisation problems involved in using one combining class zero
    >> character, CGJ, to modify a combining mark,
    > ...
    > This is completely in keeping with the intent of the CGJ in the
    > standard, and the proposal did not, in any way, "ignore the
    > combining class and normalisation problems" in this case.

    Peter apparently didn't read the section I quoted from N2819 about CGJ
    not causing normalization problems.

    -Doug Ewell
     Fullerton, California

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 14 2004 - 15:20:11 CDT