RE: Unicode fundamental character identity

Peter Constable via Unicode <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.unicode.general
Message-ID <SJ2PR10MB7671035FAE94280103AC468286F52@SJ2PR10MB7671.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
Source separation for round-trip compatibility was a principle applied circa 1990 for compatibility with widely-used standards at that time.

Today, source separation is not a sufficient criterion for encoding distinctions in other legacy character sets. It can be provided as part of the evidence in a proposal, but other evidence would be required as for any new character proposal, in particular that a text element cannot be adequately represented using any existing character sequences and that there is a significant user community requiring public, plain-text interchange.


Peter

From: Sławomir Osipiuk <[email protected]>
Sent: February 3, 2025 10:36 AM
To: Peter Constable <[email protected]>; Peter Constable via Unicode <[email protected]>; [email protected]; James Kass <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Unicode fundamental character identity

On Monday, 03 February 2025, 12:19:06 (-05:00), Peter Constable via Unicode wrote:
As stated previously, Unicode makes no guarantee of supporting source separation / round-trip compatibility with HP264x.

I'm honestly surprised by this. I always thought (because it was repeated so many times - must remember repetition does not equal truth) that round-trip compatibility with old character sets was a founding cornerstone of Unicode and so contrastive use (aka source separation) in an old charset would be persuasive evidence for inclusion.
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.