Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

[Buddha Buck]

Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >It does bring up a deeper issue, however. Unicode is, at the moment, 
> >apparently inadequate to represent at least some part of the asian 
> >languages. Are the encodings currently in use less inadequate? I've been 
> >assuming that an Anything->Unicode translation will be lossless, but this 
> >makes me wonder whether that assumption is correct.
> 
> One reason perl5.7.1+'s Encode does not do asian encodings yet is that 
> the tables I have found so far (Mainly Unicode 3.0 based) are lossy.

Er, are the Unicode tables going to be embedded in /usr/bin/perl6?
That doesn't give me a warm, cozy feeling about Perl-6 support of
Unicode.

I think it's great that Perl internals will be able to handle
arbitrary strings of Unicode characters (using some version of UTF-*),
but may I suggest that anything that relies on the properties of
characters (case, conversions, combining, visibility, etc) require
explicit library support?  We'd lose some things, like normalization,
but we wouldn't have to carry around huge tables, either.

> 
> 
> -- 
> Nick Ing-Simmons
> who is looking for a new job see http://www.ni-s.u-net.com/