Re: [idn] REORDERING: stability issues and UTC solutions

From: DougEwell2@cs.com
Date: Sun Oct 21 2001 - 15:15:26 EDT


In a message dated 2001-10-21 7:22:07 Pacific Daylight Time, lsb@postel.co.kr
writes:

> My question was that:
> 1) newly-approved TAGALOG characters X,Y have NFC X -> Y,

This is simply not going to happen. Unicode/10646 has promised us they are
not going to add more compatibility characters, though, believe me, they have
had plenty of requests.

> Future TAGALOG may provides two sets of TAGALOG basic alphabets.
> One set A in official lexicographical ordering and the other set B
> is in frequecy ordering (sub-optimal one OKAY) with 1:1 NFKC defined
> from A onto B.

Are you actually suggesting that UTC encode each character twice?

> IF UTC accepts REORDERING as an official normalization form like
> NF-REORDERING , then we need no such tricks like above, and
> TAGALOG support can be done within that NF in the new
> NAMEPREP steps: mapping/NFKC/PROHIBIT and then NF-REORDERING .

Is this scheme of reordering for the sake of compression really UTC's concern?

I would suggest that Soobok read not only UTR #15, but also the page called
"Unicode Policies" on the Unicode web site. There is a very clear
description of some things Unicode (and by extension ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2)
simply will not do. It may be a real eye-opener for some.

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Oct 21 2001 - 16:21:38 EDT