On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 01:55:27PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > merely asked the key question, but left it unanswered: what are we > trying to accomplish here?
Yeah, sorry that I wasn't clear. I think the issue may actually be that we can't decide which is needed, and there's a temptation to make this local policy. I think that's a bad idea: we should have one method. Decisions like this are what "the customers" wanted, I think. Therefore, > 1. Apply the language-sensitive mappings from SpecialCasing.txt > 2. Apply the context-sensitive (i.e., "language-insensitive") mappings > from SpecialCasing.txt > > I'm still not sure what to do about about full vs. simple case mapping, > but I see no strong reason to prefer simple case mapping because I don't > see a problem with our algorithm resulting in two characters (e.g., > "ss") instead of one. I think all of these are right (so I think we should say that we don't prefer simple case mapping also). A -- Andrew Sullivan [email protected] _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
