From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Wed May 18 2011 - 12:25:09 CDT
A somewhat shorter explanation:
The comparison with existing Latin precomposed characters is not
relevant. Almost all of those were added for compatibility with
existing standards, as Philippe said.
Text editing and processing with combining marks is not "very difficult
and erroneous." The one use case that Plamen mentioned (a user manually
deleting a base letter) is easily trained. Unicode has been around with
this architecture for 20 years now.
There are plenty of fonts that support Cyrillic base letters with
combining marks. There are plenty that don't, especially older fonts,
but on no account is it 99%.
There is no great urgency to break stability and introduce duplicate
encodings for Cyrillic text. All Cyrillic text can be represented using
the existing architecture.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 www.ewellic.org | www.facebook.com/doug.ewell | @DougEwell Â
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 18 2011 - 12:28:28 CDT