Re: Blueberry/Unicode/XML

[John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>]

Rick Jelliffe scripsit:
>  > However, I presume there was a good reason why the current name character
> > scheme was implemented.  The reasons I can think of are easily dismissed
> or
> > dealt with.  Are there any other more serious implications?
> 
> Yes.

[excellent list snipped]

> 7) Because it is not really very expensive to implement. But just allowing
> any surrogate without nitpicking is fine.  

This is the only bit I have trouble with.  Astral Plane characters (despite
the wiseass unofficial name) have just the same issues as Basic Multilingual
Plane ones:  in particular, on Plane 2 there is a big hunk of compatibility
ideographs used for CNS round-tripping, which should be excluded for
exactly the same reasons that the Korean round-trippers on the BMP
should be: they are *exactly* the same as existing unified (i.e. regular)
ideographs, and are kept only because of a legacy character set.

-- 
John Cowan                                   cowan@ccil.org
One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore
	--Douglas Hofstadter