Re: RE: Why does the spelling (capitalization) of decomposition types differ in DerivedDecompositionType.txt from UnicodeData.txt?

prospero via Unicode <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.unicode.general
Message-ID <trinity-b9006488-bb6d-4b30-983e-4f1b977faa9f-1739897989802@3c-app-mailcom-lxa05>
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?
>
>
>
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.