- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:36:55 -0800
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
- CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, andrewc@vicnet.net.au
Phillips, Addison wrote: > ... > Both are semantically equivalent and normalize to U+00E9. I can send > either to the server in my request and get the appropriate (normalized) > value in return. Conversely, I should be able to select: > > <p>è</p> > > ... using either form. I might be returned the original (non-normalized) > sequence in the result. The point is that processes that are normalization > sensitive must behave as if the data were normalized. Why is that a > contradiction? I think Boris's point is that we have a message from Andrew Cunningham http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Feb/0033.html saying that form input data must not be normalized. This is incompatible with the idea that the browser can internally adopt NFC. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 2 February 2009 22:38:03 UTC