Re: OT: (of Lua) Re: Unicode?

[Alexey Desyatnik <tls@...>]

On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:18:43 -0500, <RLake@oxfam.org.pe> wrote:

> Suppose I have three strings: "Ångstrom", "Ångstrom", and "Ångstrom".
[...]
> identical, but they don't, at leat on this machine, with this mail client 
> and this font (Windows NT / Lotus Notes / Lucida Sans Unicode 10 pt, as 
> it happens), where they look slightly different.

Windows XP Pro / Opera M2 7.11 RU / Courier New 10 pt - the same. There are
no ideal Unicode fonts yet... or font displaying engines?

> Well, OK, that is a bit of a cheat because I think they actually turn 
> into the same string if you apply any Unicode Normalisation 
> transformation. But what about Cyrillic? (Or Greek, for that matter.) Do 
> the identifiers "A", "А", and "Α" refer to the same object or not? (That 
> was U+0041, U+410 and U+391, respectively.) What is the general case in 
> which this is not a Bad Thing? If you are referring to display of text, I 
> would say that was a pretty specific case.

Not so specific, really :) Let's take "B", "C", "E" (latin) and
"В", "С", "Е" (russian). They look identically, but... their alphabetic
position is different (2, 3, 5 and 3, 20, 6 resp.). So these letters _must_
be different for correct sorting etc.

> It could have been otherwise with a simple rule: 1 glyph == 1 code.

Simple but wrong...

P.S. Sorry for bad English ;)

--
WBR, AD