From: Carl W. Brown (cbrown@xnetinc.com)
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 11:45:35 EST
Jill,
The dotted and dotless i are distinctly different, however I like to fold
them when doing searches because I don't know of any cases where is would
case search problems. However if I am searching for Istanbul and what to
include the dotted spelling as well.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]On
Behalf Of Arcane Jill
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:04 AM
To: unicode@unicode.org
Subject: RE: Case mapping of dotless lowercase letters
I sometimes wonder whether or not it was a wise choice to regard "LATIN
SMALL LETTER I" and "LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS I" as distinct. Too late to
change it now, of course, but (with the benefit of hindsight) it occurs to
me that if U+0069 had been regarded as dotless, all these problems would
never have arisen. Western fonts could still have rendered it with a dot,
Turkish fonts could have rendered it without a dot, and everyone would have
been happy.
As an analogy, albeit a rather silly one, if (in mathematics) I put a dot
over a (single-letter) variable name to indicate (say) first derivative or
something, I would have to put an extra dot over i, would I not? Does that
not make it "conceptually" dotless, even though it's rendered with a dot?
Jill
Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm making this up as I
go along. Don't take any of it seriously.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philippe Verdy [mailto:verdy_p@wanadoo.fr]
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:15 PM
> To: Unicode@Unicode.Org
> Subject: Case mapping of dotless lowercase letters
>
>
> This is quite irritating, because original strings that are
> distinct with
> case folding will not remain distinct with case folding, if
> they are first
> converted to uppercase.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 15 2003 - 12:33:05 EST