Mathias Bynens wrote:
>> Rather than changing the spec based on anecdotal evidence, [...]
>>
>> It seems irresponsible to assume now that nobody anywhere needs
>> it.
>
> What assumption are you talking about? Markus and Nova provided actual
> examples of implementations not following the spec, an
> On 7 Jun 2016, at 17:56, Doug Ewell wrote:
>
> Rather than changing the spec based on anecdotal evidence, […]
>
> It seems irresponsible to assume now that nobody anywhere needs
> it.
What assumption are you talking about? Markus and Nova provided actual examples
of implementations not foll
Mathias Bynens replied to Nova Patch:
>> [...] Based on my past research for Unicode Regular Expression
>> Engines at IUC38, I suspect that there might not be any regex engine
>> that actually supports syntax like Script=IsGreek as described in
>> UAX44-LM3! If anybody knows otherwise, I’d love t
> On 7 Jun 2016, at 00:39, Nova Patch wrote:
>
> […] Based on my past research for Unicode Regular Expression Engines at
> IUC38, I suspect that there might not be any regex engine that actually
> supports syntax like Script=IsGreek as described in UAX44-LM3! If anybody
> knows otherwise, I’d
Den mandag 6. juni 2016 skrev Doug Ewell følgende:
>
> Mathias Bynens wrote:
>
> > The `is` prefix doesn’t provide any functionality that would otherwise
> > be unavailable. It doesn’t add any value, yet causes incompatibility,
> > author confusion, and it increases implementation complexity.
>
> I
On 6/6/2016 9:09 AM, Markus Scherer
wrote:
Interesting discussion!
ICU does not support "is" nor "in"
prefixes. I wasn't even aware that UAX #44 loose matching
prescribes "is". ICU just implements what
Interesting discussion!
ICU does not support "is" nor "in" prefixes. I wasn't even aware that UAX
#44 loose matching prescribes "is". ICU just implements what
Property[Value]Aliases.txt say:
# Loose matching should be applied to all property names and property
values, with
# the exception of Stri
>
>> The `is` prefix doesn’t provide any functionality that would otherwise
>> be unavailable. It doesn’t add any value, yet causes incompatibility,
>> author confusion, and it increases implementation complexity.
>
> I don't see any evidence that it adds no value. Support for existing
> implemen
> On 6 Jun 2016, at 18:04, Ken Whistler wrote:
>
> UAX #44 doesn't *require* any regex engine to include this "is prefix"
> handling.
Are you referring to the fact that the first paragraph on
http://unicode.org/reports/tr44/#Matching_Rules uses “strongly recommended” and
“should” instead of
Mathias Bynens wrote:
> Looking at implementations in the wild, Steven Levithan found
> (https://github.com/mathiasbynens/es-unicode-regexp-proposal/issues/2#issuecomment-143288062)
> that some regex flavors use `Is` for scripts, some for blocks, some
> for scripts and blocks, some for neither. Si
On 6/6/2016 12:58 AM, Mathias Bynens wrote:
Backwards compatibility seems to be the only good reason to continue supporting
the `is` prefix*for existing implementations*, such as the one in Perl. But why
is it still a requirement for new engines to support it as part of UAX44-LM3?
I’d like to
Thanks Ashley.
>
> On 06 June 2016 at 08:58 Mathias Bynens wrote:
>
>
> http://unicode.org/reports/tr44/#UAX44-LM3 mentions the `is` prefix:
>
> > For loose matching of symbolic values, an initial prefix string "is" is
> > ignored. […] Ignoring any initial "is" on a symbolic v
12 matches
Mail list logo