Re: Greek chars encoded twice -- why?

From: Doug Ewell (doug@ewellic.org)
Date: Fri Feb 19 2010 - 07:33:47 CST

Next message: spir: "Re: Numerals across code pages"

Previous message: vainateya: "Numerals across code pages"
In reply to: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org: "Re: Greek chars encoded twice -- why?"
Next in thread: Hans Aberg: "Re: Tifinagh - extension for complete common Berber alphabet isomorphic with Latin"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

<vanisaac at boil dot afraid dot org> wrote:

> Precomposed characters are currently discouraged from use,

By whom?

> and I believe NFKD is the prefered normalization.

The World Wide Web Consortium, the IETF (RFC 5198), and many others have
standardized on NFC.

> Personally, I would put precomposed characters, C0 and C1 controls,
> and Latin-1 micro sign at the top of my list of what you characterize
> as "flaws".

Lumping all C0 characters together here seems problematic.

--
Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |  http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s

Next message: spir: "Re: Numerals across code pages"
Previous message: vainateya: "Numerals across code pages"
In reply to: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org: "Re: Greek chars encoded twice -- why?"
Next in thread: Hans Aberg: "Re: Tifinagh - extension for complete common Berber alphabet isomorphic with Latin"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 19 2010 - 07:36:25 CST