* Re: Int. letters & is_basic [not found] <4g0vtl$80a@toads.pgh.pa.us> @ 1996-02-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [not found] ` <EACHUS.96Feb16114954@spectre.mitre.org> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1996-02-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Tore asks "I'm wondering about is_basic and to_basic in ada.character.handling. It seems like the point is to take one letter with some kind of marking, and turn it into the letter without the marking (e.g. in Norwegian we use a_grave and e_acute, but they are not letters in the alphabet). If this is the point, then they are not defined correctly (at least not for the Norwegian letters o_oblique_stroke and a_ring which are letters in the alphabet). As I wrote in another posting, I'm making a package for codepage 850. I'm also planning to make cp850.handling. If is_basic and to_basic isn't supposed to do what I indicate above, then I'll probably make something that does what I want :-). Anyway, I would like to know if there are other letters in latin_1 which is treated wrong by is_basic. My main concern is sorting. All comments are welcome!" Sorry, Basic and To_Basic turn A-ring into A. That's the way it is defined. Yes, I know perfectly well that A-ring has nothing to do with A, but that's still the way it is defined. You will need to define your own mappings that work sensibly :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <EACHUS.96Feb16114954@spectre.mitre.org>]
[parent not found: <4g2pdc$15lc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>]
* Re: Int. letters & is_basic [not found] ` <4g2pdc$15lc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> @ 1996-02-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1996-02-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Norman says "letter with any diacritical mark removed. Therefore, A.3.2(27) is incorrect not to have listed a_ring and o_oblique_stroke among the basic [letters]" No, Norman is wrong here. We discussed this in WG9 specifically. We knew that A-ring is a "real" letter. However, the decision as to what are diacritical marks and what are not is indeed not uniform across the users of Latin-1. The definition of Basic and To_Basic are based on a simple rule derived from the names used in the ISO standard. They are well defined, but maybe not what is needed in some particular national contexts. Norman, this specific point was discussed at the CRG meeting held at the Villars meeting. We all understood the problem perfectly well, but there is really no other possible solution than that taken in the RM that would hold water. Personally I wanted to remove Basic and To_Basic compleely, but could not get agreement on this. P.S. CLA readers may be amused by Jean Ichbiah's "crossword" test here.The question is whether different versions of a letter can be used for the down and across clues. The answer for E-Acute in French is for example yes, the answer for A-Ring and A in Swedish or N and N-tilde in Spanish is no. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Int. letters & is_basic [not found] ` <EACHUS.96Feb16114954@spectre.mitre.org> [not found] ` <4g2pdc$15lc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> @ 1996-02-19 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus 1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Robert I. Eachus @ 1996-02-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <4g2pdc$15lc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen) writes: > No, he is saying that the ring in a_ring and the oblique stroke in > o_oblique_stroke are not diacritical marks, any more than the diagonal in > "R" is a diacritical mark placed on a "P". They are distinct Norwegian > letters. As far as I know, there is no language in which the ring and > the oblique stroke occur as diacritical marks. They are treated as such in English! And, yes, both angstrom and oersted occur in my English dictionary as units of measure. (Excuse the spellings, I don't want to have to create a MIME message and post it.) Someone with the OED on disk might try checking to see if there are ANY letters in the Latin-1 set which don't occur there. There are, of course, letters in English and the OED that don't occur in the Latin-1 set. The most obvious of these is the OE dipthong found in encyclopedia. (It was there in earlier drafts but was replaced by Multiplication_Sign and Division_Sign. If you care. ;-) > This can and should be fixed by a binding interpretation of the ARG. This can and should be fixed only by providing culture specific packages. -- Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1996-02-19 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <4g0vtl$80a@toads.pgh.pa.us> 1996-02-17 0:00 ` Int. letters & is_basic Robert Dewar [not found] ` <EACHUS.96Feb16114954@spectre.mitre.org> [not found] ` <4g2pdc$15lc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> 1996-02-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1996-02-19 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox