Casefolding Sigma (was: Re: IDNAbis Preprocessing Draft)
Michael Everson
everson at evertype.com
Tue Jan 22 20:01:54 CET 2008
At 13:42 -0500 2008-01-22, John C Klensin wrote:
>By contrast, final form sigma is not about character confusion
>in any way. It is about:
>
> (i) Whether final form characters are fundamentally
> different characters than the base forms of the same
> characters?
Capital B and small b are different characters. Capital Sigma, small
sigma, and small final sigma are different characters.
> (ii) Whether it is necessary and desirable to encode
> typographic variations in the DNS for IDNs. Note that
> a "yes" answer to this question puts one on a slippery
> slope toward needing to encode glyphs and fonts, rather
> than characters.
Small final sigma is not a "typographic" variation of small sigma.
They are not freely interchangeable. So your question is not
appropriate, it seems to me.
> (iii) What the general rules should be for presentation
> variations of characters that are normally
> position-sensitive and whether Greek final sigma is a
> sufficiently special case that it should be treated
> differently from all other final forms or
> context-sensitive presentation forms more generally.
The idea that Greek users should not be allowed to use final sigma is
shocking to me. There must be a technical solution found for them.
--
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list