Re: String name and Character Name

From: Otto Stolz (
Date: Mon Apr 25 2005 - 10:14:51 CST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Missing Phonetic Symbols (A-M)"


    wrt. the Alias subsection of TUS 16.1, I had written:
    > Now, here we have TUS mentioning character names in user interfaces.
    > Thank you from pointing me there :-)

    Peter Kirk has written:
    > Ahh, the smoking gun!

    Sorry, I do not understand this remark. An idiom, perhaps?

    I had written:
    > ... Hence the above sentence simply says: "If the
    > case mapping is obvious, we will not clutter this list with it; however,
    > if it is not obvious, we will mention it in an annotation. In any case,
    > you can look at the Unicode Character Database, which is comprehensive,
    > in this respect."

    Peter Kirk has written:
    > OK, but the case mapping is obvious only if the character name is parsed
    > as a meaningful string, against the principle that it should be
    > considered only a meaningless (but unique and stable) identifier.

    TUS says "unique and stable", TUS does not say "meaningless". Of course,
    the names are intended to be meaningful, but -- as we have learned in this
    thread -- stability is considered more important than correcting the odd
    error in a name. In the case at hand, the names are just meaningful enough
    to greatly simplify the character list in TUS 16.1.

    Best wishes,
        Otto Stolz

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 25 2005 - 10:15:29 CST