- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:44:14 +0200
- To: Ambrose Li <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org, W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>
> Pardon my ignorance too, but this is complete news to me. As far as I > can tell the discussion was not "revolved around" input methods at > all. IME was part of the discussion, but in no way was the focus. What was the focus? It seemed to me that the way the non-matching strings originate is the crux of finding if there is an actual problem to which normalization is a solution. Obviously, Unicode makes it possible to construct canonically equivalent but codepoint-wise different strings, but surely it matters if these differences actually arise in ways that cause notable problems for Web authors who'd like to mint identifiers in their own language. > For short strings (whether in Chinese or accented Latin like French or > German) I often retype them instead of doing a copy-and-paste. After > all, if you can see what it is (and this happens ONLY when the > characters are NOT foreign to you) and you can retype it easily, why > go to the trouble of moving the mouse and copy and paste (which, > oftentimes, take more time than retyping)? Right, but do you open the Character Palette and construct French and German accented characters from combining characters in preference to any of: 1) Typing by pressing a key for precomposed character 2) Typing with dead keys 3) Copying and pasting 4) Picking the precomposed character from the palette ? -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 08:45:00 UTC