From: Karl Pentzlin (karl-pentzlin@acssoft.de)
Date: Fri May 04 2007 - 15:54:48 CST
Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2007 um 22:41 schrieb John Hudson:
JH> But it [the uppercase ß] is an uppercase letter that, per force,
JH> has no casing relationship to the lowercase
JH> letter
Of course it has a casing relationship. It is one of two uppercase
forms of "ß", the other being "SS".
One of these ("SS", with good reasons) is the value of Unicode toupper("ß").
Nevertheless, users or applications may select the other form whenever
considered appropriate.
And, of course, the lowercase of uppercase-ß is ß. Therefore, it is
proposed that the value of tolower(uppercase-ß) will be ß.
There is no requirement that toupper is the inverse function of tolower.
-- Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2007 um 22:36 schrieb John Hudson: JH> But the reader would read e as an error in place of é. If he knows the orthography of the source language, and if the error does not occur within a proper name unknown to the user. JH> He would not read SS as an error in place of the uppercase eszett, JH> because orthographically the SS is correct when he adheres to the implicit premise that there is no orthography than the current "official" German one. This is a false premise, as (as the proposal gives evidence) there are a lot of people (past and present) who use a variant of the German orthography in which the use of an uppercase-ß is correct. - Karl Pentzlin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 04 2007 - 15:55:54 CST