W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 2003

Re: more xhtml 2.0 comments

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 18:19:14 -0400
To: www-html@w3.org
CC: Michael Day <mikeday@yeslogic.com>, Donna.Worby@dardni.gov.uk
Message-ID: <3E9EF022.24792.1973CE9@localhost>

Michael Day wrote:

> > Indeed, especially as names beginning with 'Mc' are treated differently 
> > in a lexical comparison (i.e., they are placed before names beginning 
> > with 'Ma') - something that would be very difficult to represent with 
> > markup.
> 
> Good point. So perhaps "Mc" is the character that should exist?
> Either way, I don't see a superscript c or a Mc character in UNICODE at 
> the moment; does anyone know about 4.0 or upcoming versions?

I strongly doubt that an 'Mc' character will ever be part of Unicode.  
The Unicode view is that 'Mc' is what the standard refers to as a 
grapheme, and as such it should be encoded as two characters 'M' and 
'c'.  Existing multi-letter characters, sich as 'Dz' were included in 
Unicode only because they existing in pre-UNICODE character sets and 
were therefore included in Unicode to facilitate conversion between 
those character sets and Unicode on a character for character basis.

As for the suggestion of including <super>c, I also doubt that Unicode 
will include it as Mc, M<sup>c</sup>, and M<sup><u>c</u></sup> are all 
variations I've seen of how to present Mc. Might I suggest using this:
  <abbr title="Mac">Mc</abbr>
since 'Mc' will probably never appear in Unicode unless someone can 
provide a more impressive reason than what has neen presented here.
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2003 18:19:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT