This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 75 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 75 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Alex Shinn <alexshinn@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I agree with Bear that case-mappings are poorly defined on single > codepoints. You guys still need to get your terminology straight: The case mapping is perfectly well-defined---you just don't like the definition. That I can sympathize with, but the whole case-folding issue doesn't have any easy solutions, as you point out. What the SRFI draft gives you is access to the info in UnicodeData.txt. Whether that's useful or not depends on the application. Anything beyond that is certainly desirable to have (but probably not in the core language), but it's a much harder nut to crack, API-wise and implementation-wise, which is why we're punting on this for now. For my applications, the case mappings defined in the draft are plenty useful---they're sure useful well beyond ASCII. Restricting them to ASCII would make them very significantly less useful to me. (What with me being a German an all. And BTW, no, the eszet issue is not usually a problem in practice---it sure doesn't keep the case mappings from being useful.) -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla