Thanks. I tend to agree--things that refer to the same thing should be the same.
I then wonder, "In what context does this matter, beyond PoE*?" Not saying it can't/shouldn't -- consistency is good even if it only avoids someone wondering one day whether two things really are the same or not! -- but is there a specific place where this difference causes a problem? Having one should make the argument even stronger for fixing it. ...phsiii *Purity of Essence--see "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb", 1964 -----Original Message----- From: prospero <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:00 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: RE: Why does the spelling (capitalization) of decomposition types differ in DerivedDecompositionType.txt from UnicodeData.txt? In: https://www.unicode.org/Public/16.0.0/ucd/UnicodeData.txt the decomposition type names are cammel-cased (surrounded by brackets), like this: 00A0;NO-BREAK SPACE;Zs;0;CS;<noBreak> 0020;;;;N;NON-BREAKING SPACE;;;; and: 00A8;DIAERESIS;Sk;0;ON;<compat> 0020 0308;;;;N;SPACING DIAERESIS;;;; Whereas in: https://www.unicode.org/Public/16.0.0/ucd/extracted/DerivedDecompositionType.txt the decomposition type names are capitalized on the first letter only, like this: 00A0 ; Nobreak # Zs NO-BREAK SPACE and: FB54 ; Initial # Lo ARABIC LETTER BEEH INITIAL FORM > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 at 11:04 AM > From: "Phil Smith III via Unicode" <[email protected]> > To: "'prospero'" <[email protected]>, [email protected] > Subject: RE: Why does the spelling (capitalization) of decomposition types > differ in DerivedDecompositionType.txt from UnicodeData.txt? > > This sounds interesting, but with no links or other references is a bit > opaque. Can you add more information? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Unicode <[email protected]> On Behalf Of prospero via > Unicode > Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 3:11 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Why does the spelling (capitalization) of decomposition types differ > in DerivedDecompositionType.txt from UnicodeData.txt? > > For example, "Nobreak" in DerivedDecompositionType.txt vs "noBreak" in > UnicodeData.txt. If the former is derived from the latter, shouldn't the > spelling be identical?
