- From: Martin J Duerst <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:16:52 +0100 (MET)
- To: keld@dkuug.dk (Keld J|rn Simonsen)
- Cc: rosenne@NetVision.net.il, www-international@w3.org
> >Jonathan Rosenne writes: > >> Keld J|rn Simonsen wrote: >> > and specifying equivalent encoding with combining characters >> > has been rejected by SC2/WG2. This would also be in conflict with >> > the definition of a coded character set. >> >> Keld, I gave specific quotes from 10646 that show that this is allowed. > >Yes it is allowed to use combining characters, but >the specification of equivalence tables has been rejected in SC2/WG2. Does this mean that no two different (sequences of) codepoint(s) can be considered equivalent, by no application whatsovere? Or does it mean that reasonable equivalence data is just not treated in this standard, as it also does not deal with other issues such as bidirectionality that likewise greatly benefit from clear specifications? Regards, Martin.
Received on Friday, 25 October 1996 16:17:26 UTC