Jim Jewett writes: > Even then, I don't think we *need* to do it. Unicode generally allows > tailoring (so long as you specify), and the entirety of chapter 5 > (Implementation Guidelines) is explicitly non-normative.
"Non-normative" in this case means you can claim Unicode conformance without conforming to UAX#14. However, that means we have to deny that we conform to UAX#14. If we want to claim conformance, we have no choice about FORM FEED; the "bk" class is not tailorable and "support" for FORM FEED is not optional. :-( (I don't understand why they did that; to me Bill's example is compelling.) > That said, it might be a sensible change anyhow, particularly if we > treat it like the CRLF combination, so that a Form Feed at the the end > of a line doesn't force splitlines to produce an empty line. I don't think that's conformant, but it might be a good enough compromise to be conformant*<wink>, and is Pythonic (ie, similar to CRLF). _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
