Re: Unicode Search Engines

From: David Starner (starner@okstate.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 21 2002 - 11:02:24 EST

Previous message: Lars Kristan: "CRLF vs. LF (was Re: Unicode and end users)"
In reply to: Martin Kochanski: "Re: Unicode Search Engines"
Next in thread: Doug Ewell: "Re: Unicode Search Engines"
Next in thread: Stefan Probst: "RE: Unicode Search Engines"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:50:13AM +0000, Martin Kochanski wrote:
> What happens if Unicode 3.3 defines a new precomposed character (such
> as q-tilde)? Does this mean that all existing documents might become
> retrospectively unnormalised and therefore invalid?

That's why they won't define a new q-tilde.

-- 
David Starner / Давид Старнэр - starner@okstate.edu
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
What we've got is a blue-light special on truth. It's the hottest thing 
with the youth. -- Information Society, "Peace and Love, Inc."

Previous message: Lars Kristan: "CRLF vs. LF (was Re: Unicode and end users)"
In reply to: Martin Kochanski: "Re: Unicode Search Engines"
Next in thread: Doug Ewell: "Re: Unicode Search Engines"
Next in thread: Stefan Probst: "RE: Unicode Search Engines"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Feb 21 2002 - 10:35:39 EST