From: D. Starner (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Feb 18 2005 - 14:55:59 CST
"Otto Stolz" writes:
> Possible solutions:
> A Declare the whole issue as a non-problem, as it is supposed to
> concern only the illiterate and ignorant.
> B Solve the problem on a mere glyph level, by providing particular
> fonts with two "ß" glyphs, and text-processing/type-setting software
> that has the option to chose between two different uppercasing schemes
> (standard, as dicussed above, and non-standard, exploiting the
> variant glyph).
> C Solve the problem on the encoding level with a variant selector.
> D Solve the problem on the encoding level with a new character,
> viz. CAPITAL GERMAN SHARP-S.
> I have never advocated solution A. However, D. Starner has quoted me
> in a way, as if I had done so.
That's what it certainly sounds like you've been doing. Perhaps if every
other post wasn't a message about how ignorant everyone using this is
and how revolting it is, you wouldn't come off that way.
> I deem solution D absolutely infeasable, as it will provoke severe
> compatibility problems between standard, and non-standard, captalizing.
I fail to understand why. For the sake of discussion, let's call it Latin Capital
Letter Bob. Why does Latin Capital Letter Bob, which happens to downcase to
Latin Capital Letter Sharp-S, but doesn't roundtrip under normal rules, change
-- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 18 2005 - 14:56:48 CST