Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-14 Thread Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
Not to worry, these things happen to the best of us. Just glad the root of the problem was found. Mark Mark On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 5:51 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: > On 07/09/2018 02:11 PM, Karl Williamson via Unicode wrote: > >> On 07/08/2018 03:21 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: >> >>> I'm

Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-14 Thread Karl Williamson via Unicode
On 07/09/2018 02:11 PM, Karl Williamson via Unicode wrote: On 07/08/2018 03:21 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: I'm surprised that the tests for 11.0 passed for a 10.0 implementation, because the following should have triggered a difference for WB. Can you check on this particular case? ÷ 0020 ×

Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-09 Thread Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
Thanks, Karl. Mark On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 10:11 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: > On 07/08/2018 03:21 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: > >> I'm surprised that the tests for 11.0 passed for a 10.0 implementation, >> because the following should have triggered a difference for WB. Can you >> check on this

Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-09 Thread Karl Williamson via Unicode
On 07/08/2018 03:21 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: I'm surprised that the tests for 11.0 passed for a 10.0 implementation, because the following should have triggered a difference for WB. Can you check on this particular case? ÷ 0020 × 0020 ÷#÷ [0.2] SPACE (WSegSpace) × [3.4] SPACE (WSegSpace) ÷

Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-08 Thread Karl Williamson via Unicode
On 07/08/2018 03:23 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: PS, although the title was "Missing UAX#31 tests?", I assumed you were talking about http://unicode.org/reports/tr29/ Yes, sorry.

Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-08 Thread Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
PS, although the title was "Missing UAX#31 tests?", I assumed you were talking about http://unicode.org/reports/tr29/ Mark On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: > I'm surprised that the tests for 11.0 passed for a 10.0 implementation, > because the follo

Re: Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-08 Thread Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
I'm surprised that the tests for 11.0 passed for a 10.0 implementation, because the following should have triggered a difference for WB. Can you check on this particular case? ÷ 0020 × 0020 ÷ # ÷ [0.2] SPACE (WSegSpace) × [3.4] SPACE (WSegSpace) ÷ [0.3] About the testing: The tests are

Missing UAX#31 tests?

2018-07-07 Thread Karl Williamson via Unicode
I am working on upgrading from Unicode 10 to Unicode 11. I used all the new files. The algorithms for some of the boundaries, like GCB and WB, have changed so that some of the property values no longer have code points associated with them. I ran the tests furnished in 11.0 for these