Re: WORD JOINER vs ZWNBSP

On Fri, Jul 03, 2015, Richard Wordingham wrote:

> On Fri, 3 Jul 2015 17:19:13 +0200 (CEST)
> Marcel Schneider wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015, Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
> > > This only applies where it is traditional to separate words, a habit
> > > the Romans got out of and the Irish revived.
>
> > IMHO the case is a bit different in handwritten or engraved text vs
> > word processing.
>
> For your information, the Thais, Burmese and Cambodians use word
> processors. Look up line-breaking category SA for modern, mainstream
> examples of writing systems where words are not separated by spaces or
> any other character.

I considered not to reply any more in this unfaithful dialogue, where after bringing up some historic examples to make me think about them, Richard switches back to present and makes people believe I could suppose that any country could prefer the use of other means than what's world standard.
I already mentioned in this thread that I do not have any knowledge of Thai, and in another thread, that my scope is *latin* keyboard layouts.
Now lets come to the core: Why on earth do we need word boundaries for whole word search in Latin script, while Thai, Burmese and Cambodian scripts Richard mentions as examples, use implémentations that can find whole words without any need of "spaces or any other [separating] character"?

Best wishes,
Marcel
Received on Sat Jul 04 2015 - 10:03:32 CDT