That application is hindered by the fact that ππππππΊπΏπ ππππππ π‘π£π€π§π¨ππΊπΌπ are unallocated characters, forming gaps in the otherwise contiguous mathematical alphabets.
On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Richard Wordingham < richard.wording...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > On Thu, 6 Oct 2016 16:54:21 -0700 > Ken Whistler <kenwhist...@att.net> wrote: > > > On 10/6/2016 4:32 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote: > > > The > > > problem is that manually constructed lookup tables are prone to > > > human error. > > > > ... as are manually constructed algorithms that attempt to take > > advantage of sub-ranges of case pair adjacency in the Unicode code > > charts to do casing with bit arithmetic. > > Yes, it's a trade-off. The application I had in mind is converting > between mathematical letter variants and their 'plain' forms. Perhaps > there is just enough information in the UCD to allow exhaustive, > automated tests. > > For _simple_ case folding, algorithmic case folding can be expanded to > a list of range tests, generalising what is often done for ASCII. > Obviously the testing should be repeated with each new version of > Unicode, which is straightforward if the case folding is compliant with > Unicode. (Turkish would be a reason for not being compliant.) > > Richard. >