From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Apr 21 2005 - 08:11:30 CST
On 21/04/2005 03:27, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>> But if there is a majority for not formally deprecating this
>> unreliable list, I shall let people continue to incorporate this set
>> of errors into their software. Just don't expect me to buy any
>> software which uses it.
>>> a non-existent problem... all Unicode character names are adequate
>>> for their intended purpose
>> Totally untrue!
> Not so fast here. ...
OK to the last part if "intended purpose" is restricted. But it is
certainly not "a non-existent problem" but a very real one because of
the ways, perhaps unintended, in which the list is in fact being used.
> ... the intended purpose of the nameslist was deliberately *reduced*
> to providing an unique and immutable identifier, subject to the rules
> of Annex L in ISO/IEC 10646 insofar as enforced by WG2.
Thank you for clarifying this. I don't know why there is a need for a
second "unique and immutable identifier" in addition to the U+xxxx code
point identifier. But given that there is such a list, its highly
restricted intended purpose should be made more clear. This must be done
to reduce the problem of people, even major software companies which are
Unicode consortium members, using the list in unintended ways as
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 21 2005 - 08:24:56 CST