On 16 August 2015 at 19:03, Blake McBride <[email protected]> wrote:

> I understand what you are saying.  However, rather then bend outcome to
> fit technical difficulty or complexity, I prefer to take whatever technical
> effort it takes to produce the desired outcome.
>

Of course. It is, however, my current conviction that the technical effort
needed is on par with defining an extension of Unicode (including a new
normalisation form), and even if you do that you'll end up with a solution
that is very much a mess, not compatible with the rest of modern computing
(i.e. Unicode) and all for a benefit that is not even necessarily a benefit.

That said, I'm willing to listen to any technical proposal you may have as
to how to solve the real technical incompatibility between Unicode and your
requirement. It's just that I can't think of any.

Regards,
Elias

Reply via email to