-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- David Hopwood wrote: > David Hopwood wrote: > > There are several ways of solving all the problems simultaneously: > > > > a) NFC o fold o NFC. > > I should clarify that the functions I'm referring to here in a)-f) are > alternatives for the function that is used by applications to test > equivalence of valid encoded names. In the case of g),
That should be "in the case of f)". > unnormalised names are not valid, so it is sufficient to use ASCII case > folding to test equivalence. > > > b) foldafter o NFC o foldbefore, where foldafter handles only <dotted-I> > > and <ypogegrammeni> and foldbefore handles the rest. > > Actually a) and b) define the same function, so they should be considered > as a single alternative; call it ab). - -- David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/ RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5 0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01 Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBPAN1nTkCAxeYt5gVAQGq9wf/aNPKqyxe6LB4itwDxH445HBLe5nj3ehN pSPnLaceyPpmgkpjSTzGAeKo7ZWmy3HT57S5APBNcoXqoqmlwTmSLqyEkRG56ZQr zgd0/Nmf448YZrm9In5XjQ1zt72nQh5ctHxcXq1fDSUh3i8xn1mZrgb29KCIR2sz mwPnzB6MyibhIQenxDatxJrMP2JOOyhLt/x551vBMdBpSQnp2dSPKLJ9jLUjEX4P SeanT/VPoYyp2moGlg0RQReVPqnzgzYb5zjxhiU8gHlM64oy3ZYPhPqoAl+FRzrG PP3UUCovxBrp9OkBhq3VxWSYWEhCkUCrYRWY8HDMnVG0afWERE6Fjw== =JzN4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
