W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Your comment on the F&O

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:24:19 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "Ashok Malhotra" <ashokma@microsoft.com>, <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>

Hello Ashok,

Sorry, I answered one of your mails, but forgot the other.

At 05:02 03/08/26 -0700, Ashok Malhotra wrote:

>I m having trouble figuring out how to respond to your comment below from
>Could you please provide some guidance?
> > [38] *** 7.3 "For alignment with the [Character Model for the World Wide
> > Web 1.0], applications may choose collations that treat unnormalized
> > strings as though they were normalized (that is, that implicitly normalize
> > the strings)."
> >      This is somewhat misleading, in that early uniform normalization
> >      should avoid having to compare strings that differ only in
> > normalization.
> >      This should be reworded carefully. Please also point out that using
> >      highest collation strength does not imply string normalization.

Early Uniform Normalization should assure, as much as possible,
that only normalized strings are reaching the database. So the
wording should not just say "For alignment with", but should
in one way or another say that such collations may be used to
make sure that even those normalization differences that may
remain after the use of Early Uniform Normalization according
to the Character Model are ignored.

Also, collations don't treat strings as if they were normalized,
it's better to say that they treat (otherwise equal) normalized
and unnormalized strings as if they were the same. This only happens
with lower collation strengths, not with the highest collation
strength, where typically binary differences lead to a 'different'

I hope this helps. Please don't hesitate to ask again.

Regards,    Martin.
Received on Monday, 1 September 2003 21:24:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:56:49 UTC