On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 23:05, Jason Dusek <jason.du...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Although the intent of the spec is to represent characters, I > contend it does not succeed in doing so. Is it wise to assume > more semantics than are actually there? > It is not; one of the reasons that many experts protested the acceptance of this RFC is because of its incomplete specification (and as a result there are a lot of implementations currently which *do* assume more semantics, not always compatibly with each other). Punycode is "out there" now, but it's a mess and a minefield. -- brandon s allbery allber...@gmail.com wandering unix systems administrator (available) (412) 475-9364 vm/sms
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
