Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
Why wouldn't a marshalling of an NFG string automatically include the
grapheme table? That way you can realize it and immediately use it in
fast mode. Alternatively, if you were providing a persistent string
service, a post-marshalling step could re-normalize it in local NFG.
On May 18, 2009, at 14:16 , Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 11:11:32AM +0200, Helmut Wollmersdorfer wrote:
3) Details of 'life-time', round-trip.
Which is a very interesting topic, with connections to type theory,
scope/domain management, and security issues (such as the possibility
of a DoS attack on the translation tables).
I find mysef wondering if they might need to be standardized anyway;
specifically I'm contemplating Erlang-style services.
The response in NFG could either use the same table you sent (if the
response is a subset of the original string) or could attach its own
table for translation at your end.