Re: Greek chars encoded twice -- why?

From: spir (denis.spir@free.fr)
Date: Fri Feb 19 2010 - 04:50:12 CST

  • Next message: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org: "Re: Greek chars encoded twice -- why?"

    On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:45:30 -0700
    "John H. Jenkins" <jenkins@apple.com> wrote:

    >
    > On Feb 18, 2010, at 12:27 PM, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > 2010/2/18 <vanisaac@boil.afraid.org>
    > >
    > > Unicode is based on reality, not on hypothetical perfection. It is the result of compromises that place necessity over convenience,
    > >
    > >
    > > Really? What kind of reality is this that ignores the rules of a language that uses a specific alphabet?
    >
    >
    > The reality of the merger with ISO/IEC 10646. The Greek national body insisted on the inclusion of the current set of extended Greek.
    >
    ***
    > Unicode has a lot of stuff that was either an unpleasant necessity (at the time) or in retrospect a bad idea. And there are some things that would have been done differently if we'd had in the early 1990's the experience we have now.
    ***
    >
    > One lesson that Unicode learned in the school of hard knocks was that we can't change character names (however badly misspelled), and we can't get rid of characters. We did that in the past, and it was disastrous. So even though there are duplicate encodings or misleading compatibility encodings or things like that—and Greek is only the tip of the iceberg so far as such beasties go—we can't get rid of them. We can deprecate them and discourage their use, but that's about the extent of it.
    >
    > As for the bad case-mappings, because case mapping can be language-specific, the best course of action is to make sure the data in the CLDR is correct and to encourage clients to use the CLDR for case mapping (et al.). Unicode is not meant to be used in isolation.
    >
    > =====
    > John H. Jenkins
    > jenkins@apple.com

    Very interesting note, thank you. (Esp. the highlighted "synthetic" paragraph.) I would love to find more such comments, also on specific parts or aspects of UCS and Unicode. It helps much (at least me) and understand how things actually are, and _why_; whether one agrees or not beeing a distinct ("orthogonal" ;-) point. I need and want to get the real original reasons for design decisions; as long as it's not the case, I have the mental impression of floating inside an undifferenciated foggy space in which each possible direction is arbitrary ;-) Please share your secrets!

    Denis

    ________________________________

    la vita e estrany

    http://spir.wikidot.com/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 19 2010 - 04:52:06 CST