- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:19:02 +0200
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
- Cc: "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 19:46:28 +0200, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote: > I fail to see what the size of the code units (or choice of Unicode > encoding form) have to do with it? That is how text streams are exposed to authors through the DOM and ECMAScript for better or worse. > Sequences of code points and their comparison are the issue and it would > not be a revolution to do so in a normalized manner. I do not think it is particularly problematic if we just leave it as is. In the particular case of CSS namespace prefixes it would even require the CSS resource to be in several different Unicode normalization forms. That is just bad practice. > Normalization of stylesheets and other documents may not make sense, but > that doesn't address the problem of selection. See my recent emails and > the I18N WG's work on same. Can you please give a reference? What exactly do you mean with the problem of selection? -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 10:19:52 UTC