Open Issue #61: Proposed Update UAX #15 Unicode Normalization Forms

From: Simon Josefsson (jas@extundo.com)
Date: Wed Jan 26 2005 - 04:39:17 CST

  • Next message: Mark Davis: "Re: Open Issue #61: Proposed Update UAX #15 Unicode Normalization Forms"

    This is a copy of my review comment on the open issue #61, posted here
    for wider distribution. (This is also a repost, because I was not
    subscribed the first time I tried to post. I am sorry if you end up
    receiving duplicates.)

    Rick McGowan <rick@unicode.org> writes:

    > Issue #61 Proposed Update UAX #15 Unicode Normalization Forms
    > A proposed update to UAX #15 for Unicode 4.1.0 is available at the link
    > above. The proposed changes are listed in the Modifications section of the
    > document.

    Hello. Regarding the PR29 modification part of #61:

    This change appear to break backwards compatibility and normalization
    stability. The PR29 text suggest that the problematic sequences do
    not occur naturally. My question then is: why break normalization
    stability over something that doesn't appear to be a practical
    problem?

    Translating my question into a proposal:

    Keep the normative part of TR15 as-is, but fix the examples and
    introduction to match the normative text. Add a note on the NFC/NFKC
    idempotency, to say that idempotency is the goal, but that for a
    select few strings it does not hold and that normalization stability
    was considered more important than theoretical normalization
    idempotency.

    I am not convinced this proposal would be better than what you propose
    in the long run. However, I am concerned that normalization stability
    is given so little weight that it is violated even for situations that
    doesn't appear to have practical consequences.

    Thanks,
    Simon

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 26 2005 - 10:44:33 CST