Full Unicode based on UTF-16 proposal
glenn at skynav.com
Mon Mar 26 15:10:44 PDT 2012
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Gavin Barraclough <barraclough at apple.com>wrote:
> I really like the direction you're going in, but have one minor concern
> relating to regular expressions.
> In your proposal, you currently state:
> "A code unit that is in the range 0xD800 to 0xDFFF, but is not part
> of a surrogate pair, is interpreted as a code point with the same value."
Just as a reminder, this would be in explicit violation of the Unicode
conformance clause C1 unless it can be guaranteed that such a code point
will not be interpreted as an abstract character:
C1 A process shall not interpret a high-surrogate code point or a
low-surrogate code point as an abstract character.
Given that such guarantee is likely impractical, this presents a problem
for the above proposed language.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss