Re: Unicode Stability

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Wed Mar 02 2005 - 17:04:00 CST

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Unicode Stability"

    On 02/03/2005 20:34, Asmus Freytag wrote:

    > It's time to bring a bit more systematic treatment to the
    > discussion of stability. Here's a rundown:

    Thank you, Asmus and also Ken, for your helpful explanations.

    So, as I see it, variation selectors are not as useful as I had
    suggested. But the only way you can rescue stability is by legalising
    alternative (and not canonically equivalent) representations of the same
    data. I can see that in practice that may be what has to be done. But I
    find it hard to reconcile with the whole concept of a standard which is
    supposed to specify how text should be represented, as well as with Doug
    Ewell's definition of stability that "it does not change in a way that
    causes existing implementations or data to break".

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)
    No virus found in this outgoing message.
    Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
    Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 01/03/2005

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 02 2005 - 17:05:36 CST