Quoting Philippe Verdy <[email protected]>:
>> Maybe I haven't understood your point here - like + and *, IDC have
>> equivalence
>
> Definitely NO. Not at the Unicode normalization level, not even in the IDS
> processes.
>
> The IDC *characters* have NO equivalences.
>
The IDC equivalences are a matter of mathematics, For example U+2FF2
xyz = U+2FF0 U+2FF0 xyz. Of course in the same way as x*(y+z) = x*y +
x*z.
> Only IDS *strings* MAY have some externally defined equivalences, depending
> on the IDS usage convention rules.
>
> And there are several conventions, there's not just one standard one that
> forbids all other conventions, and even the "best" convetion is also
> changing over time.
>
What are the different conventions do you have any examples?
> This should not affect the way the IDS are rendered in plain text, i.e. as a
> string mixing radicals and isolated IDC symbols.
>
>
-------------------------------------------------
This message sent through Virus Free Email
http://www.vfemail.net
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.