From: John D. Burger (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Sep 20 2007 - 08:02:49 CDT
>> It should at best have been just a non-mandatory recommendation,
>> allowing tailoring (even IDN no longer refers to it directly, and
>> needed to redefine its own foldings).
> That's because IDN is morphing beyond simple identifiers as
> traditionally understood for programming languages and the like.
> IDN is attempting to be closer to ordinary language, and that's why
> the limitations of NFKD/NFKC become apparent.
I'm not that familiar with IDN - do the foldings specified by IDN
constitute a useful "sweet spot" for normalization/folding, somewhere
in between NFD and NFKD? That is, might there be broad classes of
applications (such as the original poster's) for which "IDN
normalization" is a good solution? I understand that any particular
application would ideally pick and choose from the possibilities in
UTR 30, but it'd be great if I could say "start with IDN" when people
ask me about these issues.
- John D. Burger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 20 2007 - 07:59:14 CDT