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

From: Simon Josefsson (
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 <> 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

    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

    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.


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