Re: Uppercase is coming? (U+1E9E)

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sat May 05 2007 - 01:40:48 CST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Uppercase is coming? (U+1E9E)"

    At 00:18 +0200 2007-05-05, Frank Ellermann wrote:

    >Not if I get the drift of questions B3 and C3, 8, 9, and 10 in
    >the submitted form correctly. Of course it would help if they
    >are answered correctly and competently by the submitter.

    As the one person who has to deal with that
    wretched form more than anyone else does, I
    assure you that its content never, ever trumps
    the content of the proposal.

    > > Adding a new character to Unicode does not generally cause any
    > > problems for older implementations -- particularly when, as in
    > > this case, the character does not really change any existing
    > > case mappings.
    >They want the as lower case of their fictitious "uppercase ".

    Oh, Frank, get a grip. It's not fictitious. You just don't like it.

    >Once they have that they could claim that it's kind of odd if
    >toupper( tolower( "uppercase " )) = toupper( ) = SS, and that
    >it was "always intended" (giving the Duden 1919 source) to have
    >toupper( ) = "uppercase ".

    The minority orthography would have to become an
    official majority orthography for that to happen.

    Michael Everson *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 05 2007 - 06:08:32 CST