Apostrophe (was Re: Names)
patrik at frobbit.se
Tue Mar 24 02:09:17 CET 2009
Then I must ask myself, why does it have the properties in Unicode it
I.e. I really do not like having the IETF "overriding" various
definitions Unicode Consortium has decided upon, because there must be
a reason why the codepoint has the classification it has. If it is
"used as a letter in a name", then it should be one of the letter
I am just trying to understand, and will of course given consensus in
this wg change (potentially) exceptions accordingly.
Where does this slippery slope end?
On 23 mar 2009, at 17.34, Mark Davis wrote:
> Look back at the email archives; this character is used in many
> in many surnames.
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 16:44, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at shinkuro.com>
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 04:41:15PM -0700, Erik van der Poel wrote:
>>>> To be more explicit, I'd like to request that U+2019 ( ’ ) RIGHT
>>>> QUOTATION MARK - aka curly apostrophe - be added to Exceptions (F)
>> Because it worked in IDNA2003, and no other reason? (This is not a
>> rhetorical question, to be clear.) I'm still not clear.
>> Andrew Sullivan
>> ajs at shinkuro.com
>> Shinkuro, Inc.
>> Idna-update mailing list
>> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20090323/535dc187/attachment.pgp
More information about the Idna-update