From: Otto Stolz (Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de)
Date: Fri Apr 22 2005 - 03:09:55 CST
Hello Peter Kirk,
you have written:
> 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.
Have you ever read Section C.6 of TUS
> But given that there is such a list, its highly
> restricted intended purpose should be made more clear.
How could that be made clearer than in TUS, section 16.1?
Quote from <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode4.0.0/ch16.pdf>:
> The character names in the code charts precisely match the normative character names in
> the Unicode Character Database. Character names are unique and stable. By convention
> they are in uppercase. Because character names are stable, mistaken names will not be
> revised, but may be annotated. For example:
> 2118 ℘ SCRIPT CAPITAL P
> = Weierstrass elliptic function
> • actually this has the form of a lowercase calligraphic p, despite its name
As said before: if you feel like suggesting a better wording
then submit via <http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html>.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 22 2005 - 03:12:12 CST